Quantcast
Channel: CHARLES HECTOR
Viewing all 2589 articles
Browse latest View live

Siti Noor Aishah Atam - Ditahan lagi di bawah SOSMA?

$
0
0

Siti Noor Aishah Atam masih terus menjadi mangsa ketidakadilan - Buku yang didakwa dalam pemilikannya bukan pun buku yang diharamkan di Malaysia...SOSMA, POCA semua digunakan dalam kes Siti...Kini ditahan lagi mengunakan SOSMA selepas Mahkamah Rayuan membenarkan rayuan pihak pendakwaan - kes dikembalikan ke Mahkamah Tinggi untuk diteruskan perbicaraan...

Kena buang Universiti kerana tak hadhir - adakah kerana pada masa itu beliau dalam tahanan polis? Kenapa parti politik dan ahli politik tidak mahu terlibat berjuang untuk Siti Noor Aishah? Adakah kerana beliau hanya 'orang biasa"? Badan Peguam Malaysia pun sudah membuat Resolusi kes ini...

Apalah ertinya pemilikan buku-buku tersebut yang dikatakan mempunyai kaitan dan unsur-unsur pengganas menjadi suatu kesalahan keatas sesiapa yang memiliki buku-buku tersebut, walhal pihak Kementerian Dalam Negeri gagal menjalankan fungsi sebenarnya untuk mengharamkan dan seterusnya menghapuskan buku-buku tersebut. Tanpa tindakan tegas pihak Kementerian Dalam Negeri untuk membendung gejala ini, buku-buku tersebut masih lagi berleluasa dipasaran dan boleh dimiliki oleh sesiapa sahaja samada untuk pembacaan umum ataupun sebab sebab yang lain. Pada fikiran mahkamah ini kegagalan pihak Kementerian Dalam Negeri untuk mengharamkan buku-buku tersebut tidak sealiran dan tidak konsisten dengan menjadi pemilikan bukubuku tersebut suatu kesalahan menurut Seksyen 130JB(1)(a) Kanun Keseksaan.- dari Alasan Penghakiman Mahkamah Tinggi
Siapa yang memutuskan sama ada buku ini berkaitan dengan 'terrorist' - Pakar? Siapa pakar ini? Apakah kelayakkan pakar ini? Jika kerajaan Malaysia belum membuat keputusan mengharamkan sesuatu buku - bagaimana boleh katakan pemilikan buku itu haram? Buku yang diharamkan harus disenaraikan dengan jelas supaya semua tahu...Pos akan datang mungkin kita akan menilai siapakah 'pakar' ini? Pakar untuk DNA, bahan kimia, mengapa seorang mati OK - tapi pakar untuk katakan buku ini ada unsur keganasan berkait rapat dengan kumpulan ini dan itu - bukankah itu hanya 'pendapat' peribadi - tak ada asas saintifik pun?

Pegawai Penyiasat (SP6) kemudiannya telah merujuk 12 buah buku-buku diatas kepada 3 orang saksi Pakar(SP2)[Dr. Wan Adli bin Wan Ramli- Pendapat Usuluddin], (SP9)[Prof. Dr. Rohan Gunaratna – Pakar Kajian Keganasan]dan (SP10)[Ustaz Hj. Zamihan bin Hj. Mat Zin- Pakar Kajian Keganasan] untuk mengkaji dan memberikan pandangan mengenai buku-bukutersebut. Saksi-saksi tersebut telah mengeluarkan pandangan masing-masing yang bertanda (P42)(P45A)(P52(1)hingga (12)).Hasil pandangan ketiga-tiga pakar ini menyatakan bahawa buku-buku tersebut menunjukkan unsur-unsur khawarij atau keganasan yang berkait rapat dengan Kumpulan Pengganas Islamic State, Al-Qaeda dan Jemaah Islamiyah.



PEMIKIRAN SEMPIT - Membaca sesuatu buku tidak akan mempengaruhi seseorang melakukan sesuatu tindakan 'terrorisma' - Manusia ada sifat 'ingin tahu' - dan akan membaca dan cuba memperolehi semua jenis maklumat, mengambil kira semua pendapat -- dan akan dengan BIJAK akan buat keputusan sendiri mengenai pendirian peribadi. Pembacaan buku bertentangan dengan pendirian sendiri juga penting untuk proses menangani pemikiran sedemikian - Kalau tak tahu 'point' pihak lawan, bagaimana mahu 'response' - menangani pendapat salah tersebut... Pengharaman atan penghalanagan akses kepada buku, filem dan pendapat lain adalah sesuatu yang hanya tidak bagus untuk pembangunan peribadi seorang insan. Tugas kerajaan adalah untuk menangani pendapat dengan pendapat supaya semua faham apa yang betu dan apa yang tidak baik...Semua peguam pun perlu baca buku sedemikian - kalau tidak bagaimana cabar 'pakar' sebegini - adakah peguam Siti Noor Aishah diberikan salinan buku berkenaan untuk baca sendiri - Kalau tidak, macam mana nak cabar pendapat atau kesimpulan 'pakar'?
  
Sila baca posting sebelum ini:-

Siti Noor Aishah - POCA,POTA..dimansuhkan - Resolusi Badan Peguam

Release Siti Noor Aishah Atam from Poca restrictions, kata 36 kumpulan (Malaysiakini, 20/12/2016) 

Siti Noor Aishah Atam - victim of SOSMA, found Not Guilty by High Court, then re-detained under POCA? 

Siti Noor Aishah Atam - Alasan Penghakiman Mahkamah Tinggi - Mahkamah Bebas Polis Tangkap Lagi Guna POCA??


Bekas pelajar sarjana Siti Noor Aishah ditangkap, sekali lagi

   
Bekas pelajar sarjana, Siti Noor Aishah Atam ditangkap semula di bawah Akta Kesalahan Keselamatan (Langkah-Langkah Khas) 2012 (Sosma) dan kini ditahan di penjara Kajang.

Tangkapan dan penahanan itu dikuat-kuasakan semalam, selepas beliau hadir di Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur. Tindakan itu susulan rayuan yang dibuat oleh Timbalan Pendakwa Raya terhadap keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi yang membebaskan beliau pada September tahun lalu kerana memiliki 12 buah buku.
Siti Noor Aishah sebelum ini ditahan di bawah Akta Pencegahan Jenayah 1956 (Poca) dan Sosma.

"Pada saya, dia ditahan berulang kali, sebelum mahkamah dapati dirinya bersalah terhadap sebarang tuduhan.

“Ini ibarat hukuman sebelum bersalah. Hingga terpaksa (menggunakan) kedua-dua Sosma dan Poca," kata peguamnya, Mohd Kamarulzaman A Wahab kepada Malaysiakini hari ini.

Siti Noor Aishah, 29, pertama kali ditahan pada Mac tahun lalu, di bawah Seksyen 130JB Kanun Keseksaan dan Sosma, kerana memiliki 12 buah buku yang didakwa berkaitan dengan kumpulan pengganas.

Pada bulan berikutnya, dia didakwa di Mahkamah Tinggi di Kuala Lumpur dan tidak mengaku bersalah memiliki buku-buku berkenaan, selepas kes itu dibicarakan.

Siti Noor Aishah, seorang bekas pelajar sarjana Usuluddin, Universiti Malaya, berkata beliau menggunakan buku-buku berkenaan untuk penyelidikan ijazah sarjananya.

Selepas dia ditangkap pada Mac tahun lalu, Universiti Malaya memecatnya, kerana gagal menghadiri kelas.

Kamarulzaman berkata tiada satu pun buku diharamkan oleh Kementerian Dalam Negeri, ketika itu, mahupun sekarang.

Pada bulan September tahun lalu Mahkamah Tinggi melepas dan membebaskan Siti Noor Aishah daripada semua pertuduhan atas alasan tiada kes prima facie dibuktikan terhadapnya.

Pada hari yang sama, beliau dibebaskan, Siti Noor Aishah ditangkap semula di bawah Poca dan ditahan selama 60 hari.

Sebaik dibebaskan daripada Poca, beliau diletakkan di bawah tahanan rumah, dengan peranti pengawasan elektronik dipasang. Beliau juga tidak dibenarkan untuk meninggalkan daerah Surah di Dungun, Terengganu, tanpa kelulusan polis.

"Kes berkenaan dihantar semula ke Mahkamah Tinggi untuk dia membela diri, tetapi sebaliknya dia ditahan lagi.

“Kes ini balik semula kepada status quo, tanpa sebarang ikat jamin dibenarkan sementara menunggu perbicaraan," kata Kamarulzaman tentang penangkapan itu semalam.- Malaysiakini, 28/3/2017

SUHAKAM siap siasatan mati dalam tahanan polis -S.Balamurugan..dakwa polis terlibat?

$
0
0
Syabas SUHAKAM kerana melakukan tindakan pro-active memulakan penyiasatan segera mengenai kematian Balamurugan yang meninggal dunia dalam tahanan polis pada 7/2/2017...dan kenyataan dapatan siasatan dihebohkan pada 29/3/2017 (siap dalam masa kurang dari 2 bulan). SUHAKAM berjaya menyiapkan siasatan sendiri melibatkan 43 saksi dan sudah keluarkan kenyataan ini pada 29/3/2017? ...bagaimana dengan pihak polis?



Adakah pihak polis sudah siap melakukan penyiasatan mengenai kematian ini?Adakah polis sudah mulakan siasatan? Atau adakah ini juga akan berlaku 'cover up' untuk membantu rakan polis yang telah melakukan kesalahan - solidariti?  Adakah pegawai polis yang bertanggungjawab sudah didakwa di Mahkamah? Adakah terdapat apa-apa arahan 'tutup kes'? Banyak soalan - kita tunggu sama ada pihak polis atau pihak pendakwaraya atau pihak Menteri Zahid Hamidi akan memberikan jawapan...

Majistret perintah hantar hospital pun langsung tidak dihiraukan...Ingat dalam kes Siti Noor Aishah Atam pun, Hakim menolak permohonan pendakwaan untuk terus menahan Siti sehingga rayuan - tetapi selepas itu Siti ditahan lagi...

Tindakan tidak menghormati dan mematuhi perintah Mahkamah dikalangan polis dan pihak pendakwaan sangat merisaukan ...Bukankah ini penghinaan Mahkamah?

Apakah yang Najib dan kerajaan UMNO-BN akan melakukan sekarang? 

Polis yang membunuh atau melakukan kesalahan jenayah harus didakwa dan dibicarakan di Mahkamah - tak mahu 'tindakan disiplin' dalaman...Polis yang melakukan kesalahan, dan mereka yang bantu 'cover up' harus bukan sahaja didakwa tetapi juga segera disingkirkan...Rakyat berhak mempunyai polis yang bersih, beramanah, mempunyai integriti dan yang tidak mengingkari undang-undang. MACC nampaknya aktif menyiasat dan mendakwa polis 'korup' - polis yang mendera, membunuh atau tidak melakukan tugas berasaskan undang-undang juga harus didakwa....

Sejak 2010 sehingga February 2017, seramai 1,654 telah mati dalam tahanan...
1,037 were Malays, 222 ethnic Chinese, 182 ethnic Indians, 28 from other ethnicities, and 185 foreigners. - See more at:http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/over-1600-deaths-in-custody-since-2010-dpm-reveals#sthash.cD8dSBNU.dpuf


Pos berkenaan:-

Resolusi Peguam 'Dakwa Polis melakukan jenayah', dan singkirkan 'polis kotor' - kes Syed Mohd Azlan?




Press Statement by SUHAKAM on the death in custody of Balamurugan M Suppiah

Thursday, 30 March 2017 07:26pm
ImageThis item is reproduced from here.

KUALA LUMPUR (29 MARCH 2017) - The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) concluded its independent investigation into the death of Balamurugan M Suppiah (S.Balamurugan) who died at the North Klang District Police Headquarters on 7 February 2017. According to the police, he was found unconscious in a temporary holding area for detainees at about 11.30pm. SUHAKAM begun its investigation in accordance with sections 4(1) and 12 of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999 on 10 February 2017, and in the interest of public truth. Through interviews and statements recorded from 43 witnesses, SUHAKAM identified several areas of concern that continue to arise in relation to deaths in police custody.

At the outset, SUHAKAM reiterates that the right to life is the most fundamental human right, within which no derogation is permissible. As guaranteed in Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution and recognised in Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the right to life is a prerequisite to the realisation of all other human rights.

The deceased was arrested with two other suspects at around 6.30pm on 6 February 2017 and taken to the Bandar Baru Klang Police Station. During its investigation, SUHAKAM was informed of alleged ill-treatment and beatings of all suspects by the police between 7.30pm to 9.30pm at the police station. Before he were taken to the North Klang District Police Headquarters, the deceased was allegedly hit on the ears, beaten on his feet and legs and punched and kicked in his chest. SUHAKAM was informed that the deceased was shivering and not able to walk when he was sent to the Shah Alam Centralised Lock Up at approximately 4.10am the next morning. The suspects were produced before the Klang Magistrate’s Court at around 10.00am on 7 February 2017 for an application for further remand. The remand for the deceased was refused and the Magistrate directed the police to take him for immediate medical treatment.

SUHAKAM interviewed the Magistrate on 23 February 2017 and was informed that the deceased had a swollen face and eyes and was unable to sit up, stand or even hold his head up when his name was called in her Court. Although the police had the opportunity to take the deceased to the hospital, they failed to do so and took him back to the North Klang District Police Headquarters at about 1.15pm. SUHAKAM was informed that the deceased was shivering again at this point but he was not given any medical attention. By approximately 6.30pm by which time his detention became unlawful, S.Balamurugan’s condition had deteriorated severely to the extent that he had no control from urinating. At approximately 11.30pm, the deceased was found unconscious or presumably dead by the Investigating Officer. SUHAKAM notes with concern that from approximately 7.00pm to 11.30pm, the deceased was not monitored or checked on by the policemen on duty. SUHAKAM considers it to be the duty of the Investigating Officer to be responsible for the acceptance, safety, security, health condition and welfare of any person arrested and detained by the police.

SUHAKAM wishes to point out that although the police had 24 hours to detain the deceased, they may have deliberately flouted the Court Order or wilfully abused their powers when the deceased was taken back to the North Klang Disctrict Police Headquarters, purportedly for his statement to be recorded. Evidence show that this was not done and the deceased was instead held without a reasonable and credible justification. 

The post mortems conducted by Hospital Tuanku Ampuan Rahimah Klang (HTAR) and Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) both revealed that the cause of death of S.Balamurugan was coronary artery disease. Of note, the second pathologist from HKL concluded that the cause of death was coronary artery disease with blunt force trauma, and the time of death could have been as early as 9.00pm or 10.00pm.

It is SUHAKAM’s view that the allegations of ill treatment and torture corroborate the statements by both pathologists, in that the deceased had, among others, bruises and swelling on his eyes, a large bruise on his chest below his right nipple, swelling on his right ear, lacerations on his ears, injuries on his right chest muscle, blood clots on his right temple, back injuries and severe muscular injuries to his feet and ankles. The second pathologist indicated that he also found that the deceased had obvious bruises on his knees, fingers, back of his left lower leg, lower back and the back of his thighs.

Both post mortems revealed that the deceased was suffering from chronic liver failure and liver cirrhosis. While this is unlikely to be the cause of death, in the second pathologist’s medical opinion, this was a possible explanation for the bleeding from the mouth and nose of the deceased. Both pathologists also concluded that the deceased had a blocked left artery and was suffering from a severe heart condition, but it is their medical opinion that the injuries could have triggered a heart attack or worsened his heart condition leading to his death, given the severity of the injuries. The HKL pathologist noted that while the deceased had serious underlying medical concerns, the injuries on his body could not be ignored as they appeared to be abusive injuries, and not self-inflicted or accidental in nature.

The circumstances under which the deceased was detained after the application for remand by the police was refused were unacceptable. He had endured approximately a further 9 hours of detention prior to his death, after he was released by the Court. This in our view demonstrates a blatant disregard for respect for human life and dignity and the conditions in which he was held may be inconsistent with the Federal Constitution (Article 5(1)).

SUHAKAM is satisfied that the police knew or ought to have known, even more so when the Magistrate had made her observations and order, of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of the deceased, and that the police failed to take adequate measures within the scope of their powers which, judged reasonably, might have been expected to avoid such a risk. SUHAKAM is of the view that there appears to be serious breach or wilful disregard of the duty to protect life by the police due to cumulative failures on their part to provide medical attention to the deceased. SUHAKAM underlines that where there is an alleged breach of this duty of care, there is an obligation on the police to investigate and to carry out an efficient, independent and reasonable investigation, which must lead to the perpetrators’ identification and prosecution.

Evidence from SUHAKAM’s investigation also identified numerous systemic failures on the part of the police in regard to the treatment of detainees in police custody, including but not limited to failures to follow the Lock up Rules 1953, police standard operating procedures, the Court Order and relevant international human rights norms and standards.

SUHAKAM reiterates that in accordance with Principle 1 of the United Nations Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, “all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be treated in a humane manner and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person”. Principle 6 further states that “no person under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”. SUHAKAM’s investigation however revealed allegations of torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of persons in police custody. The statements of the other suspects alleged that the police had during interrogations applied paint thinner and chilli powder on the body of two of the other suspects including on their genitals. They claimed to have been beaten with a rubber hose and wooden stick, as well as with a handcuff chain for their confessions.

Two suspects arrested in relation to this investigation were below 18. While the police must observe certain legal rights whenever they arrest or detain a child suspect, SUHAKAM’s investigation revealed that the police may have been in breach of section 85 of the Child Act 2001 that stipulates appropriate arrangements shall be made to prevent a child while being detained in a police station from associating with an adult who is charged with an offence. Both suspects who are below 18 were placed in custody with the deceased who was an adult. According to section 87 of the same Act, after the arrest of a child, the police officer or other person making the arrest shall immediately inform a probation officer and the child’s parent or guardian of the arrest. SUHAKAM notes that the law in this regard was not complied with.

Despite a growing awareness of issues concerning the proper treatment of persons in police custody, the implementation of best practices and recommendations, particularly from SUHAKAM’s 2016 Death in Custody Report is seriously lacking. Some recommendations have not been implemented at all and it is observed that the police are still ignorant of their duty of care to detainees or the fact that there is a responsibility on the police to ensure that the individual in their custody is not deprived of his right to life.

In accordance with its legal duty, SUHAKAM makes the following recommendations to the Government of Malaysia and Police Di-Raja Malaysia (PDRM):




  • To ensure that anyone deprived of their liberty is detained lawfully and in a lawful, recognised and gazetted place of detention in accordance with the law. 



  • To investigate cases of abuse and misconduct by the police, including as described above, and prosecute police officials responsible for the illegal detention, ill-treatment and/or torture of the deceased which in his case may have caused and/or contributed to his death.



  • To investigate incidents of alleged torture and abuse of the other suspects by the police, and prosecute police officials responsible.



  • To ensure internal disciplinary proceedings and criminal action for breaches of instructions, including the Court Order relating to the case.



  • As police lock-ups or facilities are not intended for or equipped to handle suspects who require immediate or sustained medical , SUHAKAM reiterates its recommendation in its 2016 Report on Death In Custody to place a custodial medical team in police lockups as well as too review the 1953 Lock-up Rules.

  • SUHAKAM is of the view that the increase in the number of deaths in police custody warrants an increased scrutiny of the operation and funding of police lock ups, particularly in relation to health services and general conditions.

    -END-

    TAN SRI RAZALI ISMAIL
    Chairman
    The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)
    29 March 2017

    Pekerja 'sektor awam' boleh kritik kerajaan - kes 5 cikgu ...Kesatuan Sekerja mesti bersama pekerja bukan majikan?

    $
    0
    0
    Tindakan disiplin terhadap 5 guru kerana 'kritik' kerajaan,... Apa sebenarnya yang mereka katakan atau lakukan kurang jelas...tetapi Menteri mengatakan bahawa "...We are a democracy. If you say on social media 'the government is wrong, the minister is wrong and this should be done instead', that is fine..."..."But if you go to the extent of slander, then that is wrong. Just don't go overboard," he[Education Minister Datuk Seri Mahdzir Khalid] said. Pendirian NUTP, saperti tersiar dalam media pula menyedihkan, "“You cannot work for the government and then talk bad about your employer,” he[NUTP president Kamarozaman Abdul Razak] said. “This is hypocritical and it’s against the oath we took as civil servants.”. Adakah kesatuan sekerja pekerja sektor awam membantah arahan amalan atau 'oath' yang mengurangkan atau menafikan hak pekerja? Baca lapuran media berkenaan di bawah ini untuk mendapat gambaran tepat apa yang telah disiarkan.

    Justeru, masa untuk kita membincangkan hak pekerja serta juga pekerja 'sektor awam'...Hak bersuaradan meluangkan pendapat - termasuk hak menghebohkan salah laku majikan, serta 'kritik' majikan dikhalayak umum adalah hak pekerja yang tidak boleh dinafikan...Bukan tugas pekerja menjaga 'imej' majikan...bukan tugas pekerja untuk kempen untuk UMNO-BN...

    Penjawat AWAM (Public Servant) bukan 'orang gaji' kerajaan(Government Servant) semasa. Mereka bekerja untuk rakyat Malaysia - bukan untuk UMNO-BN....atau untuk kerajaan gabungan parti pembangkang. 

    Kerajaan semasa akan menentukan polisi, program dan arahan kerja semasa - pekerja terpaksa bekerja bersungguh-sungguh melaksanakan polisi, program dan arahan kerja yang diberikan oleh kerajaan semasa...walaupun secara peribadi mereka mungkin tak bersetuju...TETAPI ini sama sekali tidak harus menghalang pekerja daripada meluangkan pendapat/pendirian peribadi di luar waktu kerja...

    Jangan pula kita lupa bahawa kedua-dua bekas Perdana Menteri Malaysia, dari parti UMNO,  Tun Razak (sejak 1950) dan Tun Hussein Onn((sejak 1945) adalah penjawat awam atau pekerja 'sektor awam' kerajaan penjajah British...Adakah mereka mengkritik kerajaan British semasa....? Jika tidak, adakah mereka sebenarnya terlibat dalam perjuangan menyingkirkan pemerintah British sehingga Malaysia mencapai kemerdekaan? Jangan pula kerajaan UMNO-BN kini bertukar pendirian kini mengenai hak penjawat awam atau pekerja 'sektor awam"...Hak untuk kempen dan bekerja untuk menyingkirkan (atau menyimpan) kerajaan UMNO-BN adalah hak peribadi seorang individu yang tidak harus dicabul...asalkan tidak dilakukan semasa waktu kerja...

    Upon his return from the United Kingdom, in 1950, Tun Razak joined the Malayan Civil Service.[1] Owing to his political calibre, he became the youth chief for United Malays National Organisation (UMNO). Two years later, he worked as the Assistant State Secretary of Pahang and in February 1955...
    Tun Hussein came back to Malaysia in 1945 and was appointed Commandant of the Johor Bahru Police Depot. The following year he joined the Malaya Civil Service as an assistant administrative officer in Segamat, Johor. He was later posted to the state of Selangor, becoming Klang and Kuala Selangor's district officer.

    Bolehkah pekerja kritik majikan? Ya, boleh jika majikan melakukan sesuatu bercanggah dengan hak asasi, hak pekerja, hak berkesatuan, ...atau dalam perjuangan mendapatkan hak tambahan...

    Pekerja boleh menjadi ahli parti politik selain daripada parti politik yang menjadi kerajaan semasa. Pekerja boleh melaksanakan hak politik mereka(di luar masa kerja) untuk menyokong atau mengkritik  parti yang kini menjadi kerajaan, atau menyokong atau mengkritik parti politik lain yang bukan kini kerajaan TETAPI di luar masa kerja... 

    Penjawat Awam dan/atau pekerja sektor awam, menurut pendapat saya, ada obligasi tambahan kepada rakyat dan negara...yang merupakan 'BOSS' mereka. Najib dan kabinetnya boleh dikatakan hanya 'CEO dan Lembaga Pengarah' dan rakyat Malaysia adalah pemegang saham dan tuan punya 'Malaysia'. 

    CEO boleh ditukar bila-bila...(Jika majoriti Ahli Parlimen tidak lagi mahu Najib terus kekal PM, atau selepas PRU parti lain mendapat majoriti dan PM dari parti lain dipilih)...Penjawat Awam akan terus jadi 'pekerja kerajaan' tak kira parti politik mana yang berkuasa...

    Jika kita gunakan pendirian bahawa mereka yang bekerja dengan kerajaan mestilah ahli atau penyokong Najib dan UMNO-BN, dan penentang parti-parti lain - maka, jika parti lain menjadi kerajaan, adakah semua 'pekerja sektor awam' kini dibuang kerja dan diganti dengan pekerja baru pilihan kerajaan parti pemerintah baru? Ini mungkin berlaku dengan syarikat swasta bila syarikat lain mengambil alih, saperti MAB mengambil alih sistem penerbangan Malaysia daripada syarikat lama, MAS - tetapi, saperti yang dikatakan ini bukan keadaannya dengan 'penjawat awam' atau pekerja 'sektor awam'.

    Penjawat Awam dan/atau pekerja 'sektor awam' harus menumpukan tenaga mereka melakukan kerja mereka secara profesional semasa kerja - Semasa kerja, mereka tidak harus 'mempromosi' atau menyatakan sokongan mereka atau bekerja menambahkan sokongan untuk UMNO-BN, ataupun mengkritik UMNO-BN, ataupun mempromosi parti politik lain. Semua itu boleh dilakukan di luar masa kerja dalam kehidupan peribadi mereka...tetapi masa kerja, mesti kerja bersungguh-sungguh berasaskan polisi dan arahan kerajaan semasa...

    'LANTIKAN POLITIK'? - Bila masuk seorang CEO atau Perdana Menteri atau Menteri Besar baru, kebiasaannya beliau mahu melantik 'orang' dia, yang beliau percaya akan menyokong dan melaksanakan polisi, arahan dan caranya secara berkesan - beliau tidak akan mahukan mereka yang tidak sokong beliau, justeru kebiasaannya akan berlaku penukaran peringkat tertinggi kepimpinan sektor awam - biasanya Ketua Pengarah/Pengarah, Ketua Polis Negara, Pendakwa Raya(AG), dll...Ini mungkin saya setuju - tetapi pekerja sektor awam, walaupun ditukar pangkat (atau tanggungjawab kerja) tidak boleh dibuang kerja tanpa alasan wajar...

    Pekerja sektor awam 'profesional' biasanya tak perlu risau sangat kerana beliau pekerja 'profesional' akan kerja bersungguh-bersungguh berasaskan arahan dan polisi semasa, walaupun secara peribadi mungkin tak setuju dengan pimpinan kerajaan semasa

    Untuk adakan sekatan khusus menghalang mereka ,yang berjawatan ketua pengarah, pengarah, ketua..., daripada 'kritik' kerajaan semasa secara terbuka mungkin ada lojik - tetapi adalah salah untuk ini jadikan halangan sama kepada semua pekerja 'sektor awam' yang lain. Untuk makluman, pekerja pangkat tinggi dalam jawatan sedemikian juga kini dihalang menyertai kesatuan sekerja ...

    'KRITIK MAJIKAN' secara terbuka - Pekerja biasa ada hak mengkritik majikan yang mengikut pendapat mereka berlaku tidak adil. Pekerja dibenarkan berkempen mendapatkan sokongan rakyat umum menyokong berjuangan untuk mendapatkan keadilan...Dalam undang-undang Malaysia, hak ini diiktiraf - pekerja boleh berpiket ...piket mesti dilakukan bukan dalam premis majikan tetapi di luar  - untuk mendapatkan sokongan pekerja lain...untuk mendapatkan sokongan rakyat umum...menentang majikan menyokong perjuangan pekerja dan kesatuan menentang majikan. Justeru, penyataan bahawa pekerja sektor awam tak boleh kritik 'kerajaan' adalah tak munasabah...

    Pekerja bukan milik majikan. Pekerja bukan 'hamba' majikan. Pekerja tidak 'menjual' semua hak peribadinya kepada majikan. Pekerja dan majikan memasuki perjanjian kerja - Pekerja hanya diperlukan bekerja bersungguh-sungguh melakukan kerja yang diberikan majikan secara 'profesional' - itu sahaja. Majikan ada kawalan apa yang dilakukan pekerja semasa masa kerja sahaja, dan mengenai perkara berkenaan hal ehwal kerja. Pekerja, selain daripada pekerja yang diambil khusus untuk tugas mempromosi nama baik majikan/syarikat majikan saperti pekerja PR[Public relations] dan mungkin CEO dan Pengarah, memang tidak ada obligasi untuk mempromosi nama baik atau imej syarikat di luar masa kerja atau dalam masa peribadi. Pekerja yang didakwa lakukan jenayah pun tidak boleh dibuang kerja oleh majikan, sehingga pekerja tersebut dibicarakan dan didapati salah oleh Mahkamah...

    Pekerja, termasuk pekerja 'sektor awam', ada hak untuk bersuara, menyatakan pendapat, masuk atau terlibat secara aktif dalam mana-mana parti politik. 

    Pekerja 'sektor awam' ada hak untuk berkempen, tetapi bukan pada waktu kerja, untuk parti selain daripada parti yang kini menguasai kerajaan, termasuk juga mengkritik parti UMNO-BN yang kini menjadi kerajaan. 

    Pekerja, termasuk pekerja sektor awam, ada hak mengkritik secara terbuka polisi kerajaan semasa. Perkerja 'sektor awam' ada hak berkempen secara terbuka, di luar masa bekerja, untuk mendapat sokongan rakyat menolak UMNO-BN. Tindakan disiplin tidak harus diambil terhadap pekerja 'sektor awam' berkenaan tindakan mereka semasa masa peribadi mereka - bukan masa kerja.

    Jika anda memuatkan komen dalam Facebook atau media sosial pada waktu kerja , jaga-jaga kerana ini adalah salah. Pada waktu kerja, pekerja harus tumpukan perhatian kepada kerja sahaja ...aktif dalam 'sosial media' atau internet semasa waktu kerja boleh dikatakan salahlaku kerja samada kritik kerajaan atau memuatkan resipi ikan patin...Masa kerja harus kerja ...Apa sebenarnya yang telah dilakukan cikgu yang kini siasat ini? Maklumat lebih diperlukan...Harap pihak media akan terus lapurkan berita ini...

    Apabila anda meluangkan pendapat - nyatakan bahawa ianya adalah pendapat anda...

    Apabila anda mengeluarkan kenyataan fakta - pasti ianya ada asas...berasaskan kebenaran... Jangan buat kenyataan berasaskan apa yang anda dengar saja ...atau tak pasti sama ada  benar atau tidak? 

    Cara cakap setengah Ahli Parlimen dalam Dewan Rakyat bukan contoh yang baik, kerana dalam Dewan, mereka boleh cakap apa-apa tanpa risau akan disaman atau dituduh melakukan jenayah...justeru, bila mengeluarkan pendapat atau kenyataan di luar harus lebih pandai... 



    NUTP to teachers: Heed Mahdzir’s warning

    Sheith Khidhir Bin Abu Bakar
     | March 28, 2017
    'You cannot work for the government and talk bad about it.'

    Kamarozaman-Abd-Razak_guru_sekolah_60012

    PETALING JAYA: The National Union of the Teaching Profession (NUTP) has given its support to Education Minister Mahdzir Khalid’s denunciation of teachers who publicly criticise the Putrajaya administration.

    Speaking to FMT, NUTP president Kamarozaman Abdul Razak said teachers must be reminded that they had signed an oath that they would not criticise the government in public.

    “You cannot work for the government and then talk bad about your employer,” he said. “This is hypocritical and it’s against the oath we took as civil servants.”

    However, he acknowledged that teachers had the right to participate in politics although they must apply for permission from the Education Ministry. Furthermore, their speeches must be based on hard facts, he added.

    “Teachers are allowed to engage in politics, become members of political parties and even become candidates as long as they ask for and get permission to do so,” he said.

    “Nowadays, however, teachers who engage in politics do so without the ministry’s knowledge and the politics they play is unprofessional and gutter-like.”

    When asked what he thought of teachers who refrained from talking about politics in the classroom but were politically active outside, he said, “When you’re teachers, what you do outside of classrooms also counts.

    “Most students follow politics and if they find out their teachers said something about the government, then they’re going to be wondering what’s going on.”

    A Bernama report earlier quoted Mahdzir as saying that teachers who were critical of the government should resign or face the consequences. - FMT News, 28/3/2017


    Five teachers to get show cause letters for participation in Opposition activities

    KUALA LUMPUR: The government will issue show-cause letters to five teachers who are active in opposition political party activities.

    Education Minister Datuk Seri Mahdzir Khalid said although they have breached the civil servants' code of conduct, they will be given a chance to explain themselves.

    "Civil servants are subject to the General Order of the civil service, there are rules in regards to the conduct of civil servants.

    "My advice is, if you support the Opposition, show some class (beradat). Don't go overboard and resort to insults and inappropriate words," Mahdzir told a press conference after an event at the Impian KLCC Hotel here today.

    Mahdzir said the teachers in question hold party posts in the Opposition and have literally taken the stage in their events to criticise the government.

    He said teachers have the right to support whomever they want but reminded them that they are bound by the General Order.

    Mahdzir also said teachers have freedom of speech and the right to criticise, including on social media, as long as their statements are not slanderous.

    "We are a democracy. If you say on social media 'the government is wrong, the minister is wrong and this should be done instead', that is fine.

    "But if you go to the extent of slander, then that is wrong. Just don't go overboard," he said.

    Mahdzir added the teachers are still working as usual and action, if any, will only be taken after internal investigations are completed. - The Sun Daily, 27/3/2017
     

    Monopoli ASTRO tamat 28/2/2017 - Persaingan menguntungan penguna?

    $
    0
    0

    Kerajaan UMNO-BN telah memberikan hak eksklusif kepada ASTRO mulai 1997 dan ini telah berakhir pada 28/2/2017... sehingga kini tidak ada berita baru yang saya nampak, di mana monopoly ASTRO dilanjutkan...

    Apabila satu syarikat ada monopoly, dan tidak ada persaingan dari syarikat lain, harga perkhidmatan akan naik...jika pelanggan tak setuju, tidak ada pilihan lain...

     

    Bila ada persaingan, semua syarikat mahu menarik pelanggan - justeru harga perkhidmatan pun akan turun, atau pakej-pakej yang lebih baik akan ditawarkan...Lihat perkhidmatan talipon bimbit ...ada DIGI, Celcom, dll...pelanggan ada pilihan...

    Kini kita di Malaysia juga akan mempunyai pilihan untuk perkhidmatan satelite TV...harap ini akan mengurangkan perbelanjaan bulanan rakyat untuk ASTRO...dan akan wujud pilihan menjadi pelanggan syarikat lain pula..Harapan adalah kerajaan tidak akan melenggahkan proses meluluskan permohonan syarikat lain...

    Harap-harap kerajaan UMNO-BN tidak pula lanjutkan 'monopoly' ASTRO lagi...

    Astro’s satellite broadcast has exclusive rights till Feb 2017

    December 1, 2015
    This exclusive right was granted by the Government of Malaysia to MBNS in 1997. 

    KUALA LUMPUR: The government has extended exclusive satellite broadcasting rights to MEASAT Broadcast Network Systems (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd (MBNS) up to February 28, 2017, said the Communications and Multimedia Ministry.

    It said in a written reply circulated in the Dewan Rakyat that the right was maintained for the Astro operator based on the ‘no worse off’ principle during the migration from the Broadcast Licence to the Content Applications Service Provider Individual Licence.

    “This exclusive right was granted by the Government of Malaysia to MBNS in 1997 before the migration of MBNS from the Broadcast Licence under the Broadcasting Act 1988 to the new regime under the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.

    “MBNS can continue with the pay-TV broadcasting service via satellite to the general public after 2017, but not exclusively,” the ministry said in reply to a question from Hasan Arifin (BN-Rompin) who wanted to know whether the government would continue with the exclusive rights for Astro that would expire next year.

    In addition, the ministry said other companies could begin applying to purchase pay-TV broadcasting services via satellite after February 28, 2017.- FMT News, 1/12/2015

    Kesatuan dan ahli BERJAYA menghalang hasrat INFINEON mahu tukar kepada kerja 2 shift sehari?

    $
    0
    0
    INFINEON Melaka pada lebih kurang awal 2013 berhasrat menukar daripada kerja 3 shift  kepada 2 shift....TETAPI hasrat majikan tidak tercapai kerana Kesatuan Sekerja dan ahlinya membantah. Zulfadlee Thye adalah Presiden Kesatuan Pekrja Infineon Technologies(M) Sdn Bhd...

    Pengundian juga diadakan, dan 3,189 pekerja telah bersatu menolak hasrat majikan tukar kepada 2 shift - Majikan hanya mendapat sokongan 157. (Lihat gambar keputusan undi di bawah)

    Kesatuan Sekerja di mana ahli pekerja telah bertindak secara bersolidariti telah berjaya... SYABAS...

    Infineon Melaka pada masa itu telah menghormati niat dan hasrat pekerja dan Kesatuan Sekerja 










    Jika 3 shift, bererti pekerja akan bekerja hanya lebih kurang 8 jam sehari setiap syif ...jika 2 syif, mungkin pekerja terpaksa kerja selama 12 jam terus menerus setiap hari...

    Pekerja telah berjuang lama untuk dapatkan hak bekerja hanya untuk 8 jam sehari - 8 jam kerja, 8 jam rehat/tidur, 8 jam untuk kehidupan sosial(bersama keluarga, aktivit sosial  lain.) 


    Paling baik adalah kerja 8 hari setiap hari - bermula pagi dan akhir petang - supaya dapat pekerja juga balik rumah dan bersama isteri dan anak, mengambil bahagian dalam kegiatan sosial lain - persatuan, hadhir ceramah, pergi relaks membeli belah di pasar raya...pi tengok bola...dan lain-lain. 

    Pekerjaan syif sendiri memprejudiskan pekerja - kerana bila semua free, mereka terpaksa masuk kerja syif ...dan ini juga mungkin mengakibatkan aktiviti sosial dan juga kehiduppan sekeluarga ...

    Setengah kerja saperti hospital, bomba, polis ...adalah perkara yang perlu menyediakan perkhidmatan 24 jam ...justeru, terpaksa ada kerja syif...

    Tetapi, untuk setengah kilang - tujaun 'syif' adalah hanya untuk tambah pengeluaran dan 'keunutngan' majikan...jadi kilang jalan 24 jam tak henti-henti... [Ada pilihan di sini, tambah kapasiti pengeluaran dan tambah pekerja - dan tak perlu lagi syif, matlamat sama boleh dicapai majikan sedemikian - dan semua pekerja boleh menikmati 'masa free'  yang sama untuk meluangkan masa dengan suami/isteri, anak-anak, dan juga komuniti setempat... Boleh pi hadhir ceramah di Surau ...boleh pi Stadium tengok bola, boleh hadhir  ceramah politik, boleh hadhir mesyuarat persatuan, boleh lepak dengan kawan-kawan di kedai kopi...

    3 syif - sekurang-kurangnya kerja hanya lebih kurang 8 jam setiap kali ...tapi 2 syif  - kena pula kerja terus selama 12 jam...

    Kualiti kehidupan pekerja yang kerja dari jam 8 pagi hingga 5 petang ...memang lebih baik daripada kualiti hidup pekerja terpaksa kerja syif malam, atau shif sampai pagi... Bila pulang rrumah, anak sdah pi sekolah....Bila mereka 'free', orang lain kerja ...

    Pimpinan Union kuat, ahli UNION bersatu dan kuat - boleh MENANG...

    INFINEON Melaka  telah menghormati tuntutan pekerja yang wajar - apa yang kini berlaku kepada INFINEON?

    Lihat pos lain berkenaan apa yang berlaku di Infineon:-


    55 Groups - INFINEON MUST STOP UNION BUSTING AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST UNION LEADERS - Reinstate Union President?

     

    INFINEON Melaka attempt to change from 3 shift to 2 shift stopped by strong united Trade Union? 94% workers said 'NO'?

    $
    0
    0
    In 2013, the Trade Union and its members managed to stop INFINEON's(at Melaka)  plan to convert from 3 shifts per day to 2 shifts...[With 3 shift, workers would be generally working for about 8 hours - hence consistent with the recognized right for “Eight hours labour, eight hours recreation, eight hours rest.”, when before workers were working for 10-16 hours per day]. When an employer elects to use just 2 shifts per day, requiring workers to work for about 12 hours per day...then this really goes backs to things in the past...??? 

    The Union objected - A poll was taken, and almost all of the 3,000 over workers were with the Union, and rejected INFINEON's plan to change to a 2-shift per day operation. The outcome of the poll, could be seen here..


    INFINEON respected the UNION and workers - and one wonders what has changed now in INFINEON?

    Just before the start of the negotiations towards the next Collective Bargaining Agreement, INFINEON has terminated the Union President, and taken disciplinary actions against 6 other Union leaders..

    INFINEON continues to prevent the Union President from even entering the Union office and carrying out his duties/responsibilities..

    INFINEON is not allowing the Union President from participating the negotiations  leading to the next Collective Bargaining Agreement. 

    Demands for reinstatement of the Union President, a stop of disciplinary actions against the other Union leaders, etc have to date YET to receive any positive response...


    See related post:-

    55 Groups - INFINEON MUST STOP UNION BUSTING AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST UNION LEADERS - Reinstate Union President?

    Union bersama ahli berjuang tanpa takut berjaya menangani niat melakukan 'union busting'?

    $
    0
    0
    Pada tahun 2016, satu lagi UNION bersama dengan pekerja ahli union telah berjaya menewaskan tindakan majikan cuba 'serang' dan melemahkan Kesatuan Sekerja.

    Di dalam kes ini, Union telah berjuang menentang tindakan majikan menafikan beberapa hak yang sudah dipersetujui dalam Perjanjian Bersama, serta serangan secara peribadi beberapa orang pimpinan pekerja...Union ini telah berpiket di premis majikan berkenaan, di mana dokumen penjelasan isu dan pendirian Union juga diedarkan.



    Serangan terhadap General Secretary Union dan beberapa ahli Union

    Susulan itu, Presiden(atau CEO) serta bekas Pengarah Sumber Manusia telah mengugut memulakan tindakan saman malu berasaskan surat yang disediakan Union semasa piket. Ugutan mahu mulakan saman malu tersebut itu ditujukan Setiausaha Union Kebangsaaan, serta beberapa orang pemimpin Union di tempat kerja berkenaan.

    Union bersama ahli Union telah berjuang melalui surat-menyurat, serta juga melalui satu PETISYEN yang ditanda tangani hampir kesemua ahli Union ditempat kerja tersebut. UNION dan ahli telah menujukan tindakan terhadap majikan tempat kerja...

    UNION berjaya menunjukkan SOLIDARITI - petisyen ditandatangani semua ahli ditempat kerja membuktikan bahawa UNION itu kuat dan semua ahli bersatu dalam perjuangan tersebut....

    AKHIRNYA, UNION dan ahli yang berani bertindak bersama telah berjaya - dan ugutan ditarik balik, dan semua kembali secara asal.

    * Nama Union dan/atau Majikan berkenaan tak dinyatakan kerana Majikan sudah mengalah, dan keadaan kembali saperti dulu. Jika Union itu sendiri mahu memperkenalkan diri, saya serahkan kepada Union tersebut. Yang penting, ini telah berlaku dan Union bersama ahli berjaya dalam perjuangan mereka... 

    Apa yang boleh dibelajar daripada kejayaan Union ini? 

    * Jika UNION dan ahlinya berani berjuang tanpa rasa takut - UNION dan ahli akan berjaya, dan majikan akan mengalah... dan keadilan tercapai.

    * Kebiasaan setengah union apabila penindasan sebegini berlaku adalah terus lari mengadu kepada kerajaan di pejabat Industrial Relations Department(IRD)[atau Pejabat Perhubungan Perusahaan], ATAU kepada Jabatan Buruh[Human Resource Department] atau kepada Menteri berkenaan. Ini adalah pilihan yang ada untuk pekerja - tetapi ini harus menjadi pilihan terakhir.BERJUANG DULU DENGAN MAJIKAN dengan mengunakan beraneka jenis cara dulu...Cara berjuang yang ada kini ada beraneka jenis. Kena kreatif.  Piket adalah satu cara ...petisyen bersama adalah satu cara, perjuangan surat-menyurat cara lain, protes, kempen kepada pemegang saham syarikat, kempen mendapatkan sokongan orang ramai, kempen tanda tangan, dll.. Ada banyak cara lain, sebelum lari pergi adu kepada kerajaan...

    * Membuat aduan kepada IRD dan Jabatan Buruh adalah cara mudah. Pekerja tak ada Union pun boleh buat ini. Bila ada isu, dan jika pekerja bersolidariti atau ada mempunyai Kesatuan, berjuang dahulu mengunakan kekuatan kesatuan dengan majikan. Lebih baik jika perjuangan berjaya tanpa melibatkan 'referee'(Jabatan Buruh atau IRD). 

    * Kalau buat aduan kepada Jabatan Buruh atau IRD atau Menteri, apa yang berlaku? Mereka akan mulai dengan cuba dapatkan penyelesaian ...jika tak dapat dirujuk kepada Mahkamah Buruh atau Mahkamah Perusahaan...di mana proses ini mengambil bertahun-tahun...Proses pentadbiran keadilan untuk isu pekerja di Malaysia adalah tidak berkesan dan lewat...JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED.

    * Justeru, lebih baik berjuang dahulu...berjuang bersungguh-sungguh bersama semua ahli -  Jika hanya pemimpin sahaja mahu berjuang, majikan tak takut kerana di Malaysia, ramai majikan percaya ahli Union takut dan tak berani keluar berjuang bermati-matian untuk mencapai keadilan...

    Dalam kes ini, UNION telah membuktikan bahawa semua ahli UNION setempat juga bersatu dan sedia bertindak - semua sanggup menulis nama dan tanda-tangani petisyen. 

    Jika majikan teruskan, takut pula apa tindakan lanjutan Union ini dan ahli mereka...Jika majikan teruskan buang kerja 'pemimpin' - ini akan semestinya menjejaskan perhubungan dengan semua pekerja ahli yang tinggal...Majikan,dalam keadaan sedemikian, takut meneruskan ketidakadilan ...

    UNION di Malaysia perlu menyedari kekuatan Kesatuan Sekerja - SERTA keperluan bertindak BERSAMA semua ahli kesatuan...

    JUSTERU, UNION Malaysia harus lebih melibatkan semua ahli...kerja terus menerus memperkasakan ahli sangat penting. Jika kepimpinan Union, meminggirkan ahli dan gagal kerja terus memupuk 'Solidariti' dan memperkasakan ahli - Union akan mendapati ahli tak akan sedia bertindak secara solidariti diperlukan. Kerja 'organising' bukan hanya bila menubuhkan Kesatuan, atau perjuangan mendapatkan pengiktirafan majikan tetapi terpaksa diteruskan setiap masa...

    Pasukan bola kena selalu adakan latihan ....supaya bila perlu boleh terus ke Padang dan bermain bersungguh-sungguh. Tentera dan polis juga perlu sentiasa berlatih...UNION juga perlu berjuang untuk mendapatkan hak lebih, atau bila hak dicabul... justeru, ahli perlu pada setiap masa diperkasakan dengan latihan dan aktiviti...

    Di negara lain, satu cara adalah mengadakan perjumpaan semua ahli kerap - sekurang-kurangnya sekali atau dua kali sebulan{Ada Union di sana yang akan menyingkirkan ahli yang tak hadhir perjumpaan Kesatuan - Mengapa? Jawapan satu Unionist dari Indonesia adalah, 'Jika dipanggil hadhir mesyuarat Union pun tak boleh - adakah ahli sedemikian akan turun padang untuk tindakan piket/kempen/protes - lebih baik buang sahaja ahli yang tak ada semangat kesatuan sekerja...Malu jika Union panngil ahli untuk piket, tetapi yang hadhir hanya kurang 50% ahli...majikan akan ketawa dan tak hormat kepada Kesatuan Sekerja??? Kalau 90% ahli keluar bertindak....? Benar juga kata beliau..).

    Kesatuan Sekerja - bukan untuk mereka yang hanya mahu bayar yuran dan menikmati hak lebih yang diperolehi akibat Perjanjian Bersama. 

    Ahli yang diperlukan adalah ahli yang sanggup berjuang tanpa rasa takut bila ahli lain ditindas...Mereka yang tak sanggup - hanya akan berjuang bila diri sendiri ditindas...bukan ahli yang mana-mana Kesatuan perlukan..Union juga tidak mahu ahli yang hanya mahu 'merayu' tetapi tak sanggup berjuang dengan kuat untuk mendapatkan keadilan...

    Kesatuan Sekerja di Malaysia dan ahli mereka kena menilai semula Union dan ahli mereka... Berpuluhan ribu di MAS telah dibuang kerja - tetapi UNION atau ahli langsung tidak dinampak keluar protes pun. MAS was wholly owned by the Malaysian government

    G18 di syarikat subsidiary DRB-HICOM dibuang kerja - tak ada pun protes atau piket di kalangan ahli union kilang tersebut pun...(Bukankah KWSP dan KWAP pemegang saham besar dalam DRB-HICOM?)

    Najib Razak, MP Pekan, harus mencelah membantu 18 pekerja anak syarikat DRB HICOM mendapatkan kerja mereka kembali segera..

    EPF sells 5m DRB-Hicom shares - Business News | The Star Online

    www.thestar.com.my › Business › Business News
    Aug 8, 2016 - KUALA LUMPUR: The Employees Provident Fund Board disposed of five million shares of DRB-Hicom on Aug 2 when the share price was on .

    Kini di Infineon Melaka...kenapa 3,000 ahli Union masih belum keluar tindakan majikan? Beberapa Union lain dan juga MTUC telah keluar kempen menuntut keadilan kes ini...kan lebih baik jika kesemua ratusan Union juga keluar menuntut keadilan?

    55 Groups - INFINEON MUST STOP UNION BUSTING AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST UNION LEADERS - Reinstate Union President?


    Kesatuan Sekerja dan ahli mereka, jika tidak mengulangkaji cara perjuangan mereka ...kesatuan akan menjadi tak relevan...Bilangan pekerja di Malaysia bertambah - tetapi sayang, bilangan ahli kesatuan dan Kesatuan Sekerja nampaknya berkurangan??

    Bagus kita hebohkan kejayaan Union dan pekerja menentang ketidakadilan ...ini boleh dijadikan sumber inspirasi kepada pekerja dan Kesatuan Sekerja di Malaysia. 

    MTUC dan persekutuan Kesatuan saperti CUEPACs boleh membantu memperkasakan Kesatuan Sekerja dan pekerja di Malaysia... Perjuangan pekerja akan berjaya hanya jika semua pekerja dan ahli kesatuan berjuang bersama...




    RUU355 - Strategi UMNO-BN alihkan perhatian rakyat? Memecah-belah pembangkang?Berjaya?

    $
    0
    0
    Tiba-tiba Parlimen tunda perbincangan RUU355 ke sesi akan datang - kenapa tak habis bincang dan undi sampai tengah malam saperti mana pernah dilakukan dulu untuk POTA,....?
     
    UMNO-BN pada masa ini berdepan dengan rakyat Malaysia yang ramai tidak berpuas hati dengan tindakan atau kegagalan kerajaan UMNO-BN. Kemungkinan besar, pada PRU akan datang kerajaan pimpinan UMNO (kini UMNO-BN) akan ditolak rakyat Malaysia membawa kepada kewujudan kerajaan baru - kerajaan campuran parti-parti pembangkang...Bagi saya, ini satu perkembangan perlu, kerana rakyat Malaysia akhirnya akan merasai kerajaan baru, selain dari UMNO-BN, selepas lebih kurang 60 tahun merdeka...
     
     

     
    Apabila satu kerajaan berkuasa begitu lama, kemungkinan kemerosotan dalam pentadbiran berlaku adalah tinggi - korupsi, kleptocracy, dll..

    Kebebasan bersuara, berhimpun secara aman, kebebasan media dan lain-lain telah merosot - Akta saperti Akta Hasutan, dan akta lain masih digunakan untuk menghalang kebebasan bersuara. Akta Tahanan Tanpa Bicara pun kini bertambah - POCA, POTA, SOSMA,....Malaysian Insider satu daripada media alternatif yang kita sudah hilang...
     

    Isu berkaitan 1MDB, penemuan berbillion ringgit dalam akaun peribadi Perdana Menteri...masih belum ada penyelesaiannya ...walaupun di Malaysia nampaknya penyisatan telah berlaku...Hakikat bahawa Najib sendiri tidak memberikan penjelasan masih menjadi tanda tanya...

    Korupsi - sehingga MACC pun mencadangkan bahawa lebih 50% penjawat awam bawah umur 40 tahun mungkin telah lakukan kesalahan ini. Bilangan mereka yang kini disiasat bertambah ...

    Polis juga didakwa melakukan kesalahan jenayah semasa menjalankan tugas - termasuk membunuh, memalsukan lapuran dan dokumen, menyembunyikan atau melupuskan keterangan fakta (termasuk saksi), ...Ini bukan lagi dakwaan tidak berasas...bila EAIC dan SUHAKAM telah mendapati bahawa ini telah berlaku...

    Resolusi Peguam 'Dakwa Polis melakukan jenayah', dan singkirkan 'polis kotor' - kes Syed Mohd Azlan?

    Keberhutangan negara nampaknya bertambah dengan begitu pesat - kini dikatakan sudah mencecah RM900 billion, dan reserve negara pun tidak cukup menjelaskan hutang - hanya RM___ berasaskan apa yang dimaklumkan Bank Negara..
     
     
    Kos sara hidup meningkat - Perkhidmatan kesihatan di hospital kerajaan yang sepatutnya percuma atau 'nominal' kini sudah pun naik -- di mana kini penguna terpaksa membayar kos penuh untuk kelas 1 dan kelas kedua di setengah hospital? Kos pendidikan pun bertambah. Kos mendapat perkhidmatan  pergigian  yang disediakan kerajaan juga bertambah?.. Rakyat terpaksa berbelanja lebih pergi klinik-klinik setiap bulan untuk dapatkan bekalan perubatan, bila dahulu terus dapat ubat cukup sehingga tarikh temujanji doktor yang akan datang...Perkhidmatan kesihatan jantung(by-pass, angioplasty, etc) semua kini perlu bayar berpuluhan ribu...mana rakyat miskin mampu..

    Pekerja - hak mendapat kerja regular tetap sehingga umur persaraan lama kelamaan hilang. Kini, kontrak jangka pendek...atau sistem 'contractor for labour'. Gaji dan pendapatan bulanan pekerja tidak naik sapertimana diperlukan, di mana kerajaan UMNO-BN telah mengakui kegagalan ini, dengan memberikan BR1M kepada lebih kurang 7 juta orang...(iaitu lebih kurang 24 daripada 30 juta rakyat Malaysia)...
     
    Bilangan penduduk Malaysia 30 juta - kini BRIM 2017 diberikan kepada 6.3 juta orang (ini ketua isirumah/keluarga). Jika campur isteri dan katakan 2 anak sekeluarga, ini bermakna BR1M akan dinikmati lebih kurang 25 juta orang.... KESIMPULAN: UMNO-BN TELAH GAGAL JIKA 25 JUTA DARIPADA 30 JUTA RAKYAT MALAYSIA MEMERLUKAN BANTUAN KEWANGAN selepas lebihkurang 60 tahun memerintah??? -

    BR1M - Asal dapat OK? Keprihatinan lebih untuk Malaysia diperlukan?

     
    Bila beli setem 60 sen kena bayar GST...dan pengeluaran subsidi barangan makanan asas juga merunsingkan. Subsidi barangan makanan asas, minyak masak, gas, dll perlu dikekalkan tetapi kini sudah tak ada. Kerajaan suruh kita tukar petrol dengan janji subsidi tetapi janji itu juga tidak dikotai...
     
    Kebebasan rakyat bersuara atau menyatakan pendapat juga telah dibendung - kini orang tekan 'Like' dalam FB pun diambil tindakan,..Adakah Malaysia masih sebuah demokrasi ...atau sudahkah ianya menjadi sebuah 'diktatorship' kerajaan semasa....
     
    ALTERNATIF - Memang parti pembangkang ada banyak kekurangan juga - perubahan yang diharapkan di kerajaan negeri tadbiran koalisi pembangkang tidak nampak sangat ...Cara tadbiran juga banyak kelemahan... 
     
    Mengikut pandangan saya, 2 parti pembangkang yang masih mempunyai sokongan dan harapan ramai kekal adalah DAP dan PAS. PAS terus aktif di peringkat akar umbi - ceramah umum masih berlaku 2-4 kali setiap minggu di peringkat bandar/kampung - dan cabang-cabang masih aktif. DAP mempunyai ADUN dan MP yang ramai yang bersuara dan menimbulkan isu, kebanyakkan ada Blog/Laman Web dan selalu keluar menimbulkan isu rakyat di peringkat tempatan dan nasional (cuba 'Google' sahaja, boleh kita lihat...)...

    PKR harapan rakyat? Tetapi di peringkat cabang nampaknya tak aktif. Pemimpinnya juga kurang bersuara...dan menimbulkan isu kecuali beberapa saperti Rafizi, Tian Chua, N.Surendran,....

    Pakatan Rakyat gagal membawa bersama semua parti pembangkang lain - hanya cuba menghadkan kepada 3 parti saja. Parti pembangkang saperti PRM, PSM dan parti-parti pembangkang lain di Sabah, Sarawak dan Semenanjung tidak pun dijemput masuk Pakatan Rakyat.

    Pakatan Harapan - pakatan baru tetapi tanpa PAS dan masih tidak menjemput masuk parti pembangkang lain. 
     
    Pribumi, parti terbaru mereka yang kena buang dari UMNO, masih tidak dapat kepercayaan ramai dan nampaknya hanya mahu jadi "PM" dan bertanding seberapa banyak kerusi yang boleh. 
     
    Amanah, parti mereka yang berpecah dari PAS tetapi alasan meninggalkan PAS kerana 'kalah pilihanraya' mungkin boleh mendapat sokongan di Selangor tetapi mungkin sukar menarik sokongan di lain tempat...
     
    Pribumi dapat liputan media, tetapi sokongan akar umbi kepada Pribumi adalah tanda tanya...Muhyiddin mahu jadi PM...sama saperti Anwar dulu...tetapi beliau bukan Anwar, dan bekas pemimpin UMNO dalam Pribumi hanya kritik tindakan Najib - tetapi belum lagi mendedahkan kesilapan mereka dalam UMNO-BN...Kerusi yang akan diberikan kepada pemimpin bekas-UMNO ini mungkin juga jejaskan peluang menyingkirkan UMNO-BN...jika UMNO-BN kalah tipis, apa jaminan mereka yang bekas UMNO-BN tidak akan lompat kembali ke UMNO-BN? ...sama saperti apa yang berlaku di Perak dahulu??? 
     
    TETAPI - keadaan di Malaysia pada masa ini, di mana ramai rakyat tak mahu lagi UMNO-BN - kemungkinan UMNO-BN akan kalah PRU akan datang agak tinggi....tapi, rakyat tidak akan terus tolak UMNO-BN selama-lamanya kerana mereka berkemungkinan kembali berkuasa PRU akan datang ... 
     
    Jika UMNO-BN kalah PRU akan datang, jangan disalah takrif bahawa rakyat kini sokong semua parti pembangkang...Apa yang ianya akan buktikan adalah bahawa rakyat merampas kembali kuasa daripada UMNO-BN dan parti-parti politik. Selepas itu, yang berkuasa adalah rakyat - yang akan menentukan siapa yang berhak memerintah...
     
    UMNO-BN terdesak - beranika strategi dan taktik mungkin akan digunakan untuk memastikan bahawa UMNO-BN kekal memerintah...
     
    RUU 355 - Adakah ini strategi yang digunakan UMNO-BN? Biasanya Usul ahli Parlimen Pembangkang adalah di bahagian terakhir Aturcara(Agenda) harian parlimen, selepas semua soalan parlimen...dan biasanya tak sempat pun Parlimen habis semua soalan - justeru, tak sampai pun mana-mana usul yang dikemukakan oleh Ahli Parlimen parti pembangkang. Untuk RUU355 - mereka membawa kedepan perkara agenda ini...
     
    Taktik UMNO-BN boleh dikatakan 'pandai' - dan Presiden PAS dan PAS sendiri pun tak sangka ini akan berlaku. Justeru, pencadang usul cuba mengurangkan implikasi usul ini dengan menukar usul ini untuk hanya meningkatkan hukuman denda, penjara dan sebatan, dan mengeluarkan hukuman lain saperti potong tangan, dll...PAS dalam kedudukan sukar - tak boleh tarik balik usul Presiden PAS tetapi terpaksa terus berkempen untuk usul ini.
     
    Pada masa yang sama, parti lain saperti DAP terpaksa juga keluar membantah. Secara otomatik, ini juga menyusahkan PAS dan DAP bersama-sama dalam PRU akan datang menentang UMNO-BN. Keadaan lebih kompleks bila UMNO pula nampaknya macam sokong...sampai ada pemimpin hadhir perhimpunan aman menyokong RUU355. Ada yang menyangka bahawa ini hanya sandiwara UMNO-BN, yang akan pada saat terakhir berhenti menyokong RUU355...dan ini akhirnya telah dilakukan atas alasan keputusan 'concensus' parti BN. Imej UMNO-BN bertambah baik - menjadi gabungan yang lebih relevan untuk rakyat Malaysia yang berbilang kaum..berbilang agama.
     
    PAS, yang telah berusaha mengubah imej menjadi parti bukan sahaja umat Islam tetapi parti untuk semua terjejas. Jangan lupa, bahawa PAS telah juga meletakkan calun bukan Islam pada PRU lepas. 
     
    DAP juga mungkin terjejas akibat tindakan UMNO-BN ini - mereka mungkin telah kehilangan sokongan setengah orang Islam di Malaysia - tetapi tak pasti - kita lihat dahulu apa berlaku pada PRU akan datang.
     
    RUU355 - isu yang ramai rakyat takut adalah isu layanan sama rata - apa berlaku bila jenayah dilakukan seorang Islam dan seorang bukan Islam? Tak adil jika hanya orang Islam dihukum dan bukan orang bukan Islam. Bagaimana jika mangsa dan saksi bukan Islam - bolehkah keterangan mereka diterima? Bolehkah pesalah terlepas gitu saja? Justeru, ada banyak isu sampingan yang menjadi asas bantahan - bukan hanya isu sama ada hukuman denda, penjara dan sebat dinaikkan? 
      
    Strategi lain adalah liputan media - Kini banyak liputan media mengenai isu-isu pertelingkahan antara parti-parti pembangkang.... ini semua bagus untuk UMNO-BN jika gambaran bahawa pembangkang tidak bersatu diberikan???

    Kini, isu RUU355 tidak selesai di sidang Parlimen ini - mengapa tidak? Dulu, isu POTA pun Parlimen sanggup berterusan sehingga lewat malam sehingga undian dilakukan - tetapi kini RUU355 ditangguhkan kepada sesi Parlimen akan datang...Jika diundi, dan Ahli Parlimen undi menyokong...atau undi membantah, ia juga akan menjejaskan UMNO-BN tetapi jika ditangguhkan...untung untuk UMNO-BN tetapi 'sakit' untuk PAS serta juga parti pembangkang lain...

    Apa lagi yang UMNO-BN boleh lakukan pada saat terakhir? Mungkin Najib akan letak jawatan...atau akan berjanji akan letak jawatan dalam masa setahun...strategi ini pernah digunakan oleh UMNO-BN oleh Mahathir...akibat tindakan sedemikian adalah ramai yang dahulunya mungkin mengundi calun selain daripada UMNO-BN - sedia kekal mengundi UMNO-BN kerana mahu memberikan peluang kepada Perdana Menteri yang baru....Pak Lah??? Tetapi, jika Najib mengunakan taktik sama...mungkin rakyat tidak akan menerima Zahid Hamidi, berbanding dengan Pak Lah (yang pada masa itu nampaknya 'orang baik' dan 'bersih').

    Taktik pembangkang dan orang menyalahkan Najib untuk semua yang berlaku bukan taktik baik. Najib tidak boleh melakukan apa yang beliau didakwa melakukan tanpa sokongan UMNO, dan/atau sokongan parti lain dalam BN. Najib tidak boleh terus kekal jadi PM jika hilang sokongan majoriti Ahli Parlimen BN. Justeru, semua yang telah dilakukan atau gagal dilakukan kerajaan UMNO-BN adalah salah UMNO-BN....termasuk semua parti komponen GERAKAN, MIC, MCA,...dan ahli politik parti tersebut???

    RAKYAT ADA PELUANG PADA PRU AKAN DATANG UNTUK CUBA PULA CARA PENTADBIRAN KERAJAAN SELAIN DARIPADA UMNO-BN? ...APAKAH YANG AKAN DILAKUKAN RAKYAT?
     
     
     
     
     
     
     








    18 SUHAKAM Recommendations concerning Land Rights of Indigenous People in Malaysia (2013)

    $
    0
    0


    Report of the National Inquiry into the Land Rights of Indigenous Peoples
    NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION OF MALAYSIA (SUHAKAM)
    APRIL,2013

    * Below the General Recomendations (without footnotes), looking at the 18 RECOMMENDATIONS - see the full report at the SUHAKAM Website 

    The Malaysian Bar 2017 Resolution referred to these recommendations and urged the government to 


    Strongly calls upon the Federal and State Governments to immediately implement the 18 recommendations contained in the 2013 SUHAKAM Report of the National Inquiry into the Land Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Malaysia, in respect of Orang Asli and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak and, as an  interim measure, to impose an immediate moratorium on the creation of any land and/or resource interests and the continuation of resource extraction and enforcement activities within places claimed to be Orang Asli or native customary areas, pending the resolution of the customary land rights and resource claims of the affected Orang Asli or native communities;



    GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS

    RECOGNISE INDIGENOUS CUSTOMARY RIGHTS TO LAND

    10.4 The Inquiry finds that the recognition of indigenous customary rights to land is critical in protecting and promoting these rights as an indivisible and integral part of the protection and  promotion of their other human rights. Successive amendments to land laws since the British colonial period have eroded indigenous peoples’ customary rights to land. But while some positive statutory provisions do exist, much more needs to be done to enhance protection so that these are aligned with indigenous peoples’ own perspectives, court decisions and international laws.

    10.5 The Sabah Land Use Policy 2010, for example, refers to a need for the policy to be sensitive to ‘the traditions and needs of native communities’, which could help ensure full recognition of customary rights to land.


    Recommendation 1: Address Security of Tenure

    10.6 The displacement of communities mainly through the implementation of development projects, poverty eradication programmes, encroachments on indigenous peoples’ lands by plantation and other companies, and inappropriate dealings through powers of attorney, mostly by outsiders or by community leaders themselves, have occurred because of absence of land tenure security. It is therefore imperative that the government address land tenure security of indigenous peoples.

    10.7 To ensure that security of tenure and customary rights as perceived by indigenous peoples are not compromised, it is recommended that before any alienation, reservation or licence in respect of any land is made, created or issued, the authorities concerned investigate fully the status of the land by reference to relevant documentary as well as actual evidence on the ground. Relevant notices must be posted in conspicuous places to ensure actual notification. Signed receipts of notices to call for testimonies of customary land rights claimants, particularly rural indigenous peoples, must be obtained and returned.

    10.8 Recommendations for changes to laws and policies to address land tenure security, which have already been studied and/or adopted by the government, should be instituted immediately through legal and policy decisions.

    10.9 Court decisions which have recognised the concept of indigenous/native customary rights to land should be instituted promptly through administrative orders, if not amendments to existing laws.


    Recommendation 2: Clarity of Concepts on Customary Tenure

    10.10 Proper studies to clarify concepts such as rayau and traditional territories (pemakai menoa, wilayah adat) are urgently needed. The study should also recommend the reasonable land size to enable indigenous peoples to support a sustainable livelihood and cultural life, particularly those who still rely fully on the land to make a decent living and for traditional cultural survival.

    10.11 For other issues that still require further studies, discussions to clarify and review relevant laws and policies should be made and recommendations from the study should be subsequently implemented to enhance protection of indigenous peoples’ rights to land.

    10.12 Review current definitions and criteria for the establishment of native customary rights to land in the Sabah Land Ordinance (section 15) and the Sarawak Land Code (section 10) to include other important aspects of customary land use. The National Land Code should be amended to include clear provisions recognising Orang Asli customary land use.

    10.13 To review current adopted policy provisions that are not evidence -based, legal or are problematic, including but not limited to the policy giving priority to the issuance of Communal Titles in Sabah, issuing Provisional Leases in Sarawak before NCR lands are excised, and the giving of individual land titles to the Orang Asli.

    10.14 It would also be pertinent to study examples in other countries on how security of tenure for indigenous peoples can contribute to the nation’s economy and to draw parallels with the contribution of indigenous peoples of Malaysia to the economy of the state. Some examples are the Waitangi Tribunal process in New Zealand and the flexible land titling adopted by Canada for its indigenous peoples, which have already shown positive economic, political and reconciliatory results.


    Recommendation 3: Restitution for Non-Recognition of Customary Lands

    10.15 Legal provision for the restitution of land needs to be put in place. Where the possibility of returning indigenous customary lands that have been acquired in the past is not possible or feasible, alternative land or compensation should be considered.

    10.16 The Federal Constitution guarantees the right to property in Article 13 and a person’s property cannot be taken away unless the law allows it.

    10.17 Deprivation of indigenous peoples’ right to land in order to carry out poverty eradication schemes, economic development and conservation efforts, or by fraudulent means through the use of powers of attorney and other forms of illegal land transfers, has occurred without adequate mechanisms for complaints and redress. Remedying past wrongs and instituting redress mechanisms will not only restore faith in the government and reconcile conflicts, but also ensure justice and fairness to those whose land has been taken.

    10.18 Reconciliatory approaches that engage with actors in the justice and administrative systems and treat indigenous communities in a respectful manner could mitigate conflicts that may arise where there is a heightened level of frustration. The role of legal practitioners and mediators who understand the concepts of indigenous customary rights is important and can be strengthened through enhanced interaction with the communities.


    Recommendation 4: Redress Mechanisms

    10.19 The Inquiry strongly recommends the establishment of an Indigenous Land Tribunal or Commission composed of retired judges and experts on indigenous customary rights to resolve issues and complaints related to indigenous peoples’ land claims that are brought before it. The Tribunal or Commission should be empowered to decide on these complaints and issues, including appropriate settlements or redress related to a case.

    10.20 In view of the high number of cases currently filed in court, the Inquiry also recommends the establishment of a Native Title Court or a special court to deal with the backlog of cases in the civil court. Depending on the powers of the proposed Indigenous Land Tribunal/Commission, its recommendations can be subsequently brought before the Native Title Court to decide on these cases. These processes will significantly reduce the time to decide on land conflicts.

    10.21 Create an independent mediation mechanism eg. Ombudsman to provide assistance in land disputes involving indigenous peoples’ land claims. This mechanism can link with current efforts by the judiciary to encourage mediation for cases brought before the court. Mediation using the adat of the indigenous peoples should also be considered, thereby reflecting government recognition of their cultural traditions.

    10.22 Establish a mechanism to monitor the land rights situation of indigenous peoples that works closely with relevant government departments and indigenous organisations dealing  with land, and the proposed Indigenous Land Tribunal/Commission and Ombudsman.

    10.23 Legal aid and other forms of support for communities wanting to use strategic litigation and targeted advocacy to seek redress through the courts should also be provided. Where free legal aid is not available especially in Sabah and Sarawak, special arrangements for counsel from the Bar Council Legal Aid Service could be extended to these states. In addition, the Sabah Law Association and the Sarawak Bar should consider extending services similar to those provided by the Bar Council Orang Asli Committee.


    Recommendation 5: Address Past Policies & Programmes

    10.24 Review policies related to poverty eradication programmes, ensuring that acquisition of land for such programmes does not infringe on indigenous customary land rights and that independent and periodic evaluation processes are built into the programme.

    10.25 Review indigenous land development schemes and other commercial development programmes affecting indigenous peoples including the term “beneficiaries”, conditions to be imposed and the way in which Memoranda of Understanding or Agreements are explained to the indigenous peoples before the signing of such MoU or Agreement. A mechanism to obtain Free, Prior and Informed Consent from affected communities must be built in.

    10.26 A policy decision should also be made to ensure inclusion in all agreements and licences, both new and those which are being renewed, among others, express conditions requiring NCR lands to be excised before the commencement of any project, a timeframe within which such requirements are to be fulfilled, and a penalty if such and any conditions and timeframe are not complied with. These conditions should also be incorporated into agreements signed between the state government or government departments (such as the JHEOA/FELCRA and JHEOA/RISDA agreements) as well as private and government-linked companies.

    10.27 All areas which have been gazetted without proper survey and demarcation should be resurveyed. Areas already inhabited by people should be excluded.

    10.28 There should be no eviction of communities with established customary rights, including from areas that have been gazetted as forest reserves and other protected areas.


    Recommendation 6: Review Compensation

    10.29 Review compensation provisions and regulations in laws relating to acquisition of land, including the rate of compensation for lands and crops. The review should take into account the livelihood and other needs of communities in the transitional period after land is taken from them until they are fully resettled.

    10.30 Where possible, they should be given alternative land which is of the same value as the land acquired from them, and adequate basic facilities should be guaranteed.

    ADDRESS LAND DEVELOPMENT ISSUES/IMBALANCES

    10.31 The current aggressive pursuit of development in Malaysia has resulted in imbalances and negative impacts on indigenous rights. The numerous land development issues such as desecration of graves; destruction of agricultural land, crops, catchment areas and important cultural and sacred sites; water, air and noise pollution as well as unsustainable income that the Inquiry has elaborated have to be addressed to ensure development really benefits all peoples.

    10.32 Government and development partners must reconcile economic growth priorities with security of tenure. Reviewing land concessions approved in the past, linking security of tenure to investment promotion,and wealth-sharing agreements are important practical measures to be considered.

    10.33 The findings of this Inquiry also show that indigenous peoples are not against development or its process but their interests and concerns should be protected through their participation in development. Central to this concern is the commitment “to improving the livelihoods of the people and communities by creating the conditions needed for them to sustainably manage forest”.


    Recommendation 7: Adopt HRBA to Development and FPIC Law

    10.34 The Federal Constitution in Article 5 guarantees the right to life, which the courts have elaborated to include a right to livelihood and quality of life. The Declaration on Right to Development, the UNDRIP, ILO C169, CRC, CEDAW and ICESCR all contain provisions and legal measures that promote the right of participation in various forms. The report of the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on “indigenous peoples and the right to participate in decision-making” stressed the importance of State parties in ensuring that corporations respect the rights of indigenous peoples to give or withhold their free, prior and informed consent to operations that may affect their rights.

    These aspirations are clearly articulated under Articles 193 to 196 of the UN Conference -Rio+20 outcome document. Malaysia participated at two UN Conferences on Sustainable Development better known as “Rio gatherings” and endorsed the Agenda 21 document emerging from the first gathering and ‘The Future We Want’ document in June 2012 Rio+20 gathering. In both there are clear global commitments towards sustainable  development.

    10.35 The UNDP recommended that States adopt a human rights based approach (HRBA) to development so as to ensure such development will benefit both the state and its citizens. The UNDRIP and ILOC169 also recommend the adoption of an FPIC law in order to obtain consent from indigenous peoples and ensure that they would also benefit from development programmes.

    10.36 In line with international standards, the State and Federal governments must adopt such a human rights based approach to development and adopt an FPIC law outlining consent-making processes that ensure effective participation of affected indigenous communities.


    Recommendation 8: Ensure Land Development Does Not Adversely Impact Indigenous Peoples

    10.37 Prevailing development in Malaysia leans towards the development of large-scale projects (mainly plantations) by private sector investment or government linked companies. Studies (Cramb 2007, Majid Cooke 2012, and Li 2011) have shown that implementing large-scale development projects has compounded land conflicts rather than improving land matters, and poverty among indigenous peoples has not been reduced significantly.

    10.38 The Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food in his report to the UN General Assembly (A/65/281) highlighted the threat to the right to food from large-scale land investments and recommended that land development schemes must be designed in ways that do not lead to evictions, disruptive shifts in land rights and increased land concentration.

    10.39 The findings of the Inquiry indicate that when management objectives of business or government agencies change because of changes of parties in power, the effects on the ground are felt directly by indigenous peoples through the scaling down of the project. Scaling down are done through reductions in the anticipated number of participants, the cutting down of promised entitlements which means non-delivery of promised (usually unsigned) entitlements. Worst case scenarios are in the form of abandonment of projects; government relinquishing authority over the projects to other organisations or business entities; or outright sale of assets to other organisations.

    10.40 To ensure land development does not adversely impact indigenous peoples, indigenous peoples’ land and land claimed by indigenous peoples which is acquired for development and poverty eradication programmes need to be reviewed with the full and effective participation of affected communities.

    10.41 The government also needs to institute more stringent guidelines for poverty eradication programmes and built-in evaluation processes to ensure that they meet the targets and do not infringe on the rights of others.

    10.42 A review process on the calculation and disbursement of dividends and other entitlements, and the timeframe for transfer of land ownership to participants should also be conducted for indigenous land development schemes.


    Recommendation 9: Promote Successful Development Models

    10.43 Adopt small scale land development models where indigenous landowners can be fully involved. Such models should ensure land ownership and management remain in the hands of indigenous peoples, but at the same time, training opportunities to enhance skills and management should be given.

    10.44 Ensure better governance of land and tenure, as well as “best practices” by companies to make certification systems perform as they should. Better governance to improve conditions of timber and palm oil certification, housing and urban development as well as extractive industries must include the necessity to acquire free and prior informed consent from all those affected especially indigenous peoples with customary rights.

    10.45 Businesses should also be made more accountable and required to respect human rights of indigenous peoples. International standards regulating timber industries to comply with the international timber certification and trade regulations should be adopted such as the signing of Voluntary Partnership Agreements to trace where timber was harvested to ensure legality of its source and to curb illegal timber trade with particular emphasis on respecting customary land and human rights.

    10.46 Timber industries should also ensure timber extraction is respectful of the rights of the indigenous peoples. International standards regulating timber industry to comply with the international timber certification and trade regulations should be adopted such as the signing of voluntary partnership agreement (VPA) to trace where timber was harvested to ensure legality of its source and to curb illegal timber trade with particular emphasis on respecting NCR land and human rights.


    Recommendation 10: Policy Towards People-Centred Inclusive-Sustainable Development

    10.47 The agenda for sustainable development with a balanced policy agenda for economic, social and environment agenda must be the cornerstone of public policy towards indigenous people and the forest. It must have a very firm commitment for inclusive development which is sustainable, equitable and empowering.

    10.48 The Federal and State governments must also adopt sustainable forest and oil palm management in mainstreaming economic and environment policies. This necessitates the establishment of a national action taskforce comprising all the stakeholders and indigenous representatives, human rights and civil society organisations to ensure the effective realisation of the sustainable development agenda.


    PREVENT FUTURE LOSS OF NCR LAND

    10.49 To ensure lasting solutions, any potential loss of land as a result of prevailing factors has to be expeditiously addressed since protecting and promoting the Indigenous Peoples’ right to land is an indivisible and integral part of the protection and promotion of their other human rights.

    10.50 An important strategy that the Inquiry recommends is the respect for principles of free,  prior and informed consent. Various international instruments and guidelines can be useful references such as the UN Development Group Guidelines on Indigenous Peoples’ Issues, the UNDRIP, ILO 169 and CBD/Akwe Kon Guidelines, EMRIP and PFII studies, UN Human Settlements Programme –Guidance Notes for Practitioners on Land & Conflict. Other guidelines referred to earlier which relate to business and human rights are also important to recommend to both companies and government agencies to arrest future loss of indigenous customary land.


    Recommendation 11: Settlement Exercise on Indigenous Customary Lands

    10.51 The recommendation made in 10.7 above to investigate fully the status of any land claim or application by referring to relevant documentary as well as actual evidence on the ground is also relevant here.

    10.52 Customary land claims must be settled prior to the granting of new provisional leases, licenses, projects or other land alienation.

    10.53 Review and amend relevant laws to align them to universally accepted norms. It is important to mention here that the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework developed for transnational corporations and business enterprises place the obligation on the corporate sector to include rights-based practices in their operations. Businesses are obliged to do so even in countries where laws and policies are in place to protect human rights of citizens.

    10.54 Hold regular fora between indigenous peoples, government  and parliamentarians, and other stakeholders to bridge gaps in perception and understanding. Such fora could also be used by the government and parliamentarians to clear other issues and questions relating to indigenous lands before proposing policy changes or passing any bills that would affect indigenous peoples’ customary land.


    Recommendation 12: Recognition of Indigenous Lands in Protected Areas

    10.55 The Inquiry found that customary lands claimed by indigenous peoples were included in protected areas for conservation purposes (parks, wildlife sanctuaries, water catchment etc). Where indigenous communities have acceded to such inclusion into protected areas for the enjoyment of the wider society, the government should recognise the historical ownership of land prior to gazetting such land as a protected area, and credit the community for conserving and contributing their land. Where possible, they should be allowed access to continue activities that would not jeopardise the area.

    10.56 Remedies for failing to give affected communities adequate information and notices required by law prior to the gazetting of protected areas and forest reserves should be found such as the excision of the community lands, granting of an alternative area or exemplary joint management agreements for areas where communities can continue to stay.


    Recommendation 13: Indigenous Peoples ́ Active Involvement in Forest Management

    10.57 The information shared by relevant forest-based agencies at the Inquiry revealed that the involvement of indigenous peoples in forest management is very limited. Hence, a new policy directive is needed for enhanced and active involvement of indigenous communities in forest management programmes, especially in forest reserves. Proactive efforts to encourage community-based forest management, where clear structures, functions and decision-making  processes for indigenous peoples, are recommended. This effort, which had been tested and proven successful in Nepal, will prompt indigenous communities to take the lead and manage resources, while the government plays the role of supporter or facilitator.


    ADDRESS LAND ADMINISTRATION ISSUES

    10.58 Land administration plays a key role in ensuring indigenous peoples’ right to land is implemented. Currently, an enabling environment including clear structures, functions and decision-making processes related to land administration that can contribute to resolving much of the indigenous peoples’ land rights issues, are absent and need to be put in place.

    10.59 From the findings and analyses of the Inquiry, three key recommendations to address the myriad land administration issues are set forth below i.e. capacity enhancement of land department staff, reviewing current responses to indigenous land issues, and immediate implementation of corrective measures.


    Recommendation 14: Conduct Comprehensive Review of JAKOA

    10.60 In view of the seriousness of complaints and apparent weaknesses of the Orang Asli Development Department (JAKOA) in protecting Orang Asli land rights as provided by the Aboriginal Peoples Act to protect and ensure the well-being and advancement of the Orang Asli, the Inquiry recommends that an independent and comprehensive review of JAKOA be undertaken at an early date. The comprehensive review should, among others, clarify whether Orang Asli land matters should remain within the purview of JAKOA or go directly to Orang Asli communities themselves.

    10.61 While such is review is underway, the Inquiry recommends that JAKOA be more proactive in resolving existing Orang Asli land issues.


    Recommendation 15: Capacity Enhancement of Land Departments

    10.62 The Lands and Surveys Department (Sabah & Sarawak) and the Department of Land and Mines (Peninsular Malaysia), including the delegated authorities at the district level, represent the authorities dealing with land claims of indigenous peoples. Staff of these departments would benefit from capacity enhancement to ensure effectiveness in dealing with indigenous peoples’ land rights. Various human resource training courses can be conducted, including on:
    •skills to engage in a respectful manner with indigenous peoples
    •necessary legal understanding with regards to indigenous customary rights,
    •common law and indigenous customary rights
    • different models of development
    • free and prior informed consent and the mechanism to obtain consent before undertaking any development programme/project
    • international instruments relating to rights of indigenous peoples

    10.63 A network of consultants from universities, non-government organisations, the legal fraternity, government departments and knowledgeable indigenous individuals can be established to act as resources for the training as well as to provide expertise for mediation and conflict resolution processes.

    10.64 For projects that involve indigenous peoples’ land through joint-ventures, relevant authorities should provide training to their enforcement units to be efficient and proactive in ensuring that companies and government agencies are carrying out proper demarcation on the ground and observing other requirements according to the terms and conditions in the licence. A fund should be set up to acquire the services of legal experts in this area to represent the indigenous peoples during negotiations and to ensure that FPIC is properly attained.


    Recommendation 16: Review Responses to Land Issues

    10.65 The Findings chapters dealt with reviews of constraints and administrative responses for each of the regions. Responses that have negatively impacted indigenous peoples’ right to land should be examined closely by relevant authorities, and improvements and changes should be promptly adopted.

    10.66 Gaps and weaknesses in administrative procedures and practices designed to facilitate the recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights to land should be reviewed by relevant authorities to ensure more efficient implementation, taking into consideration past recommendations and studies.


    Recommendation 17: Immediate Implementation of Corrective Measures

    10.67 Land development projects, whether part of a poverty eradication programme, commercial development of indigenous and or projects on land contested by indigenous peoples, often involve several departments. When conflicts occur, these departments and other private corporations often do not want to take the responsibility for resolving such conflicts. Left unresolved, such conflicts have led to more serious confrontations. The Inquiry recommends that where a number of state departments are involved, inter-departmental coordination should be immediately mobilised to address these issues. Projects that do not have such a mechanism should include this in their administrative procedures.

    10.68 Adequate financial allocations should be made for the settlement of land claims, the processing of land applications and requests for surveying reserves, including computerisation of land databases. Land offices and other relevant departments should make budget requests for adequate funding based on the demands for land settlement they receive annually from indigenous peoples.

    10.69 Suspicions and allegations of corruption and conflict of interest by staff of the land offices give a detrimental name to these departments, especially if proven in court. Land offices should adopt and practise zero tolerance for corruption, and ensure their processes are accountable and transparent.

    10.70 Relevant authorities, particularly the land offices and forestry departments need to enhance in-house complaints handling. This could include establishing a complaints desk in each district, having proper record books for oral complaints, and establishing standards to respond to complaints. Officers who are proactive and oriented to respect indigenous peoples should be equipped with proper training to handle complaints.

    10.71 Regular awareness programmes and information dissemination should be organised by Lands and Surveys/Land and Mines Department, its delegated authorities at the district level, and other relevant agencies to explain to the public their roles and functions, and the processes and procedures involved in securing ownership and the recognition of indigenous customary rights land.

    10.72 Land offices need to set up a unit to address issues related to indigenous peoples’ right to land, including the implementation of guidelines and principles of free and prior informed consent, community consultations prior to project approval and implementation, and Environmental and Social Impact Assessments. Establishing monitoring units to ensure land agreements between developers and communities are complied with is also necessary.

    10.73 The opinion of the Ketua Kampung, Penghulu and Batin, and the native/district chiefs (of the native courts of Sabah and Sarawak) should be sought when verifying historical evidence and the demography of an area claimed under customary rights. However, in view of the negative perception about some of these leaders, alternative ways to get historical and demographic information should also be considered.


    RECOGNISE LAND AS CENTRAL TO INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ IDENTITY

    10.74 Indigenous peoples’ close relationship to their customary lands and territories means that these are significant not only as a means of livelihood but also as part of their spiritual and cultural life, and form part of their identity as peoples. The centrality of indigenous peoples’ customary lands is vital for their development and cultural survival. Effective recognition, as well as the promotion and protection of rights to land and identity would thus require time-bound, broad-based affirmative action that encompasses issues related to indigenous peoples’ development and well-being.


    Recommendation 18: Establish an Independent National Commission on Indigenous Peoples

    10.75 The Inquiry calls for the establishment of an independent National Commission on Indigenous Peoples. The functions of the Commission, among others, should be to advise the government on laws and policies related to indigenous peoples; propose and monitor sustainable development programmes on indigenous peoples’ land; promote participation of indigenous peoples at all levels; and conduct research on issues related to the well-being of indigenous peoples. The Commission members should be composed mainly of indigenous peoples’ representatives that receive the support from, and acceptance by, indigenous peoples of Malaysia.

    END.

    Apa pendirian kerajaan Kelantan mengenai isu Orang Asli, Pembalakan Haram, Korupsi? Resolusi Badan Peguam..

    $
    0
    0
    Apakah pendirian kerajaan pembangkang di Kelantan, Selangor dan Pulau Pinang berkenaan isu orang  Orang Asli? Atau adakah mereka tidak prihatin mengenai isu ini, kerana bilangan Orang Asli di Semenanjung tak ramai - justeru undi mereka tak begitu penting...

    Resolusi Badan Peguam ini adalah relevan bukan sahaja kepada kerajaan pusat di bawah UMNO-BN tetapi juga kerajaan Negeri termasuk yang di bawah parti-parti pembangkang?
     
    Apakah pendirian mereka mengenai Siti Noor Aishah dan undang-undang membenarkan tahanan tanpa bicara - adakah semua Akta sedemikian akan dimansuhkan dalam masa 100 hari selepas parti pembangkang berjaya menang PRU akan datang? Adakah semua yang kini ditahan atau dinafikan hak mereka akan segera dibebaskan? Adakah SOSMA akan dimansuhkan? Siti Noor Aishah - POCA,POTA..dimansuhkan - Resolusi Badan Peguam
     
    Apakah pendirian mengenai isu penderaan dan pembunuhan dalam tahanan? Resolusi Peguam 'Dakwa Polis melakukan jenayah', dan singkirkan 'polis kotor' - kes Syed Mohd Azlan?
     
    Apa yang parti pembangkang akan buat? Apakah pendirian mereka - selain daripada hasrat mereka menang PRU akan datang?


     
     
    Resolution Regarding Kelantan Orang Asli Land and Resource Claims, and Indigenous Peoples’ Rights

    WHEREAS the Malaysian Bar:

    (1) Recalling the Malaysian Bar resolution on indigenous peoples’ rights adopted at the 63 rd Annual General Meeting of the Malaysian Bar held on 14 March 2009 that, inter alia, called upon the Federal and State Governments, the Department of Orang Asli Affairs, all public and private enterprises, and individuals, to respect the rights of indigenous peoples as enshrined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and, in particular, called upon the Federal and State Governments to effectively recognise and protect the rights of the Orang Asli to their ancestral lands and resources (“2009 AGM Resolution”);

    (2) Affirming that all Orang Asli are entitled to the full spectrum of fundamental liberties available to Malaysian citizens, and indeed enjoy a special position in respect of their “protection, well-being or advancement” under Article 8(5)(c) of the Federal Constitution;

    (3) Affirming that in the cases of Kerajaan Negeri Johor & Anor v Adong bin Kuwau & Ors [1998] 2 MLJ 158, Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Ors v Sagong bin Tasi & Ors [2005] 6 MLJ 289, Superintendent of Land & Surveys Miri Division & Anor v Madeli bin Salleh (suing as Administrator of the Estate of the Deceased, Salleh bin Kilong) [2008] 2 MLJ 677, and Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli & Anor v Mohamad bin Nohing (Batin Kampung Bukit Rok) & Ors and another appeal [2015] 6 MLJ 527, the Malaysian superior courts have consistently affirmed the continued enforceability of Orang Asli customary land and resource rights without the need for formal recognition by the legislature and executive through written laws;

    (4) Reaffirming that the Federal and State Governments owe a fiduciary duty to protect Orang Asli customary land rights and not act in a manner inconsistent with such rights, as decided by the Court of Appeal in the case of Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Ors v Sagong bin Tasi & Ors [2005] 6 MLJ 289;

    (5) Affirming that such pronouncements form part of the substantive laws or the common law of Malaysia;

    (6) Taking note that Malaysia is obliged to uphold the underlying values of international human rights laws and norms set out in, inter alia, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and has voted, at both the United Nations Human Rights Council and the United Nations General Assembly, in favour of adopting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that, inter alia, reiterates the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination; 

    (7) Noting that the Federal Government had made a decision in June 2015 to implement the 18 recommendations contained in the 2013 SUHAKAM Report of the National Inquiry into the Land Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Malaysia, for the recognition of Orang Asli and Sabah and Sarawak native land and resource areas;

    (8) Noting with regret that there has been no effective Federal and/or State legislative or executive action to recognise and protect Orang Asli customary land and resource rights since the 2009 AGM Resolution;

    (9) Deeply concerned with recent developments in Gua Musang, Kelantan, where the Orang Asli have been subjected to numerous and recurring incidents of arrests and detentions, damage to property and harassment by or through the acquiescence of State enforcement agencies, for merely asserting their customary rights to their lands and resources through the erection of blockades to prevent logging activities from being carried out on these lands;

    (10) Deeply disturbed that the affected Orang Asli have faced obstacles in securing unimpeded access to legal counsel and humanitarian aid during the course of this conflict;

    (11) Noting with concern that environmental degradation, whether from logging activities, deforestation or other depletion of biodiversity, could directly impact upon the capacity of indigenous peoples to sustain their livelihoods and maintain their cultures and intangible heritage;

    (12) Noting with regret that the Kelantan State Government has not taken any proactive steps, or sufficient proactive steps, to resolve this impasse by demarcating and protecting those areas inhabited by Orang Asli, as required by the cumulative weight of Malaysian jurisprudence on this issue, but instead have purported to legitimise its questionable decisions in respect of the lands by conveniently interpreting the law so as to justify its actions;

    (13) Noting with regret that the Department of Orang Asli Development has, with regard to the Kelantan Orang Asli conflict, once again failed to perform a proactive role, or has abdicated its functions, to secure the effective defence and protection of the interests of the Orang Asli and their overall well-being as indigenous peoples;

    (14) Recognising that this conflict is inextricably linked to the overall and continued failure of the Federal and State Legislatures and Executives to prioritise the effective legal recognition and protection of Orang Asli-inhabited lands and resources; and

    (15) Recognising that the Orang Asli of Peninsular Malaysia and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak continue to face numerous challenges in defending their customary lands and resources despite their privileged position under the Federal Constitution and international human rights norms and documents;

    THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved that the Malaysian Bar:

    (1) Strongly calls upon the Kelantan State Government to forthwith impose a moratorium on the creation of any land and/or resource interests and the continuation of resource extraction and enforcement activities within places claimed to be Orang Asli or native customary areas, pending the resolution of the customary land rights and resource claims of the affected Orang Asli or native communities;

    (2) Strongly calls for the resolution of such rights and claims in a manner that gives full effect to the legal pronouncements of the Malaysian superior courts recognising Orang Asli customary rights to their lands, territories and resources and, more broadly, the Malaysian Government’s June 2015 decision to implement the 18 recommendations contained in the 2013 SUHAKAM Report of the National Inquiry into the Land Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Malaysia;

    (3) Strongly calls all enforcement agencies engaged with the Orang Asli to act with honesty and integrity and to uphold the rule of law in carrying out their various duties and responsibilities, at all times respecting and having due and proper regard to the legal position of the Orang Asli and their lands as determined by the Malaysian superior courts;

    (4) Strongly calls upon the Federal and State Governments to immediately implement the 18 recommendations contained in the 2013 SUHAKAM Report of the National Inquiry into the Land Rights of Indigenous Peoples in Malaysia, in respect of Orang Asli and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak and, as an interim measure, to impose an immediate moratorium on the creation of any land and/or resource interests and the continuation of resource extraction and enforcement activities within places claimed to be Orang Asli or native customary areas, pending the resolution of the customary land rights and resource claims of the affected Orang Asli or native communities;

    (5) Strongly calls upon the Federal and State Governments and the Department of Orang Asli Development, in prior consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, to take any and all appropriate measures, including legislative measures, to achieve the full spirit and intent of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; and

    (6) Mandates the Bar Council to take, and continue to take, all appropriate action that is deemed necessary to empower indigenous peoples and to safeguard, promote and protect their rights under Malaysian law and under international laws and norms.

    The motion was proposed by Steven Thiru (Chairman, Bar Council), on behalf of the Bar Council.
     

    See also :- 

     
     
     
     

    Trade Union - Most Discriminated of Association? Repeal section 26(1A) Trade Unions Act 1959

    $
    0
    0
    In Malaysia, Trade Unions are most discriminated of all forms of association. Membership of Trade Unions can simply be 'ended' by employers - the loss of employment results in loss of trade union membership by reason of an unjust section 26(1A) of the Trade Unions Act 1959. No more in employment - cannot be retained as member of trade union??

    Trade Union membership laws determined by employment requirement also is no more relevant when now employers can simply use workers provided by contractor for labour - not employees in "establishment". Trade Unions based on 'trade, occupation or industry' also cannot organize and form trade unions in these 'contractor for labour' companies as they supply workers to so many different trades, occupations or industries - section 26(1A) need to be abolished..

    Section 26(1A) - Trade Unions Act 1959 - No person shall join, or be a member of, or be accepted or retained as a member by, any trade union if he is not employed or engaged in any establishment, trade, occupation or industry in respect of which the trade union is registered. 

    KESATUAN SEKERJA (Trade Union) adalah persatuan(association) yang paling didiskriminasi di Malaysia...berbanding dengan persatuan, parti politik, association, dll...DISKRIMINASI ini telah dikekalkan dan masih dikekalkan oleh UMNO-BN...yang gagal memansuhkan undang-undang tidak adil...

    Bila ahli kesatuan dibuang kerja oleh majikan - mereka akan, berasaskan undang-undang sedia ada di Malaysia, kehilangan status keahlian mereka dalam kesatuan sekerja? Keahlian kesatuan tidak boleh dikekalkan apabila pekerja tidak lagi bekerja dengan syarikat atau 'trade, occupation or industry'berkenaan


    Justeru, bila ahli paling memerlukan bantuan kesatuan, kerajaan UMNO-BN telah memastikan bahawa mereka tidak lagi akan kekal sebagai ahli - dan hakikat ini juga akan  secara otomatik menghalang Kesatuan Sekerja membantu ahli yang kehilangan kerja secara 'formal'...Ada kesatuan sekerja juga akan pergi ke Mahkamah untuk melepaskan obligasi membela nasib 'bekas' ahli mereka...sedih.

    Penjelasan dengan contoh...

    Justeru jika seorang pekerja bank kehilangan kerja dalam bank, beliau akan terus kehilangan keahlian dalam Kesatuan Sekerja Pekerja Bank (kini NUBE - sebuah kesatuan sekerja peringkat nasional)...untuk mendapatkan keahlian kesatuannya kembali, perlu pekerja ini cepat-cepat mencari kerja dalam sektor pembankan...kalau tak dapat - terus hilang keahlian kesatuan sekerja...gitu saja. Nyata tidak adil...

    Bagaimana pula bila kesatuan itu hanya kesatuan tempat kerja saperti di MAS - MAS Employees Union(MASEU) - bila pekerja MAS kehilangan kerja, secara terus mereka semua kehilangan keahlian kesatuan MASEU...
    MAKSUD KEBEBASAN BERPERSATUAN - KESATUAN SEKERJA 

    Kesatuan Sekerja bertujuan untuk menyatukan pekerja supaya lebih 'kuat' dalam perjuangan dengan MAJIKAN. Jika seorang pekerja turun padang menentang majikan (sama ada tuntut hak lebih, atau menuntut ketidakadilan atau 'salah laku' majikan berhenti, dll), senang sekali seorang pekerja ditumpas majikan. Justeru, bila berdepan dengan majikan, perlu sangat pekerja bersatu...baru adil...baru keadaan 'sama rata'...dan itulah sebab mengapa kesatuan sekerja(Trade Union) wujud...

    Tetapi, kini MAJIKAN senang-senang boleh tamatkan keahlian pekerja dalam kesatuan dengan hanya membuang kerja... Justeru, bila sampai masa pekerja memerlukan bantuan dan sokongan Kesatuannya, beliau, berasaskan undang-undang kerajaan UMNO-BN, mendapati bahawa beliau sudah tidak lagi jadi ahli Kesatuan Sekerja ....TAK LOJIK dan sangat tidak adil...lihat seksyen 26(1A) Akta Kesatuan Sekerja 1959.


    Section 26(1A) - Trade Unions Act 1959

    (1A) No person shall join, or be a member of, or be accepted or retained as a member by, any trade union if he is not employed or engaged in any establishment, trade, occupation or industry in respect of which the trade union is registered.

    Dalam mana-mana persatuan, pertubuhan termasuk parti politik - keahlian berterusan ditetapkan ahli itu sendiri, atau persatuan - tidak boleh ditamatkan akibat sesuatu yang dilakukan pihak ketiga. Ahli boleh 'resign' atau meletak jawatan sebagai ahli, ATAU pertubuhan/persatuan boleh menamatkan keahlian seorang ahli atas sebab tertentu, biasanya selepas tindakan disiplin...

    Tetapi, bagi kesatuan sekerja - MAJIKAN boleh dengan senang-wenang menamatkan keahlian pekerja dalam kesatuan sekerja, dengan membuang kerja atau 'menamatkan pekerjaan'pekerja tersebut. Ini sangat tidak adil...

    Justeru, bila masa ahli kesatuan benat-benar perlukan bantuan kesatuan sekerja, undang-undang membatalkan keahliannya...dan Kesatuan juga sukar secara 'formal' atau sah membantu seorang yang bukan ahli Kesatuan...

    MALAYSIA perlu segera memansuhkan peruntukan ini yang mengakhiri keahlian ahli kesatuan sekerja...

    PENGECUALIAN - hasil penghakiman Mahkamah...

    KINI, Mahkamah dalam situasi terhad telah berkeputusan bahawa keahlian ahli kesatuan sekerja tidak akan luput, jika pekerja tersebut mempertikaikan pembuangan kerja tersebut di bawah seksyen 20 Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan 1967. Keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi ini dibuat pada 10/10/2013 tetapi malangnya sehingga kini, kerajaan UMNO-BN tidak membuat pindaan undang-undang perlu. Lihat alasan penghakiman kes ini, dengan mengikuti link berikut:-

    KESATUAN KEBANGSAAN PEKERJA-PEKERJA BANK & ORS v. KETUA PENGARAH KESATUAN SEKERJA & ORS - 10/10/2013 - kes section 26(1A)


    Mahkamah dalam  kes NUBE di atas ini juga menyatakan bahawa seksyen 26(A1) adalah bercanggah dengan 'international standards' - termasuk juga Konvensyen ILO saperti 'ILO convention namely C98, ie, the Convention on the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention 1949 which Malaysia ratified in 1961 ("the said Convention")' - tetapi malangnya, sehingga Malaysia meminda undang-undang sedia ada, hakikat Malaysia telah meratifikasi Konvensyen tidak akan membantu pekerja atau kesatuan...

    Bidangkuasa lain saperti di Singapura, UK, India dan Australia tidak juga ada peruntukkan tidak adil saperti seksyen 26(1A) ini - 


    (ii) Position in other jurisdictions
    Pursuant to the court's query as to the position in other jurisdictions on the issue before the court, learned counsel for the first plaintiff had looked at the trade union legislations in Singapore, India, UK and Australia to see whether there was an equivalent provision to our s. 26(1A).
    From a perusal of the relevant legislation in Singapore (the Singaporean Trade Unions Act Chapter 333); India (the Indian Trade Unions Act 1926); the UK (Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 and the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Act 1993); and Australia (Fair Work (Registered Organizations) Act 2009), it would appear that there is no equivalent provision to our s. 26(1A) or at least there is no clear provision that provides that a member of a trade union who has been terminated or dismissed from employment would automatically lose his membership upon such termination or dismissal.
    ALASAN LAIN MENGAPA SEKSYEN 26(1A) HARUS DIMANSUHKAN..

    1) 'Contractor for Labour' - kini di Malaysia, kerajaan UMNO-BN telah membenarkan majikan mengunakan pekerja yang dibekalkan pihak ketiga, iaitu 'contractor for labour' - yang kita kadang-kadang panggil pekerja 'out-source'. Mereka ini bukan 'employee' majikan tempat kerja, justeru tak boleh memperolehi faedah Collective Bargaining Agreement(CBA)[Perjanjian Bersama antara Union dan Syarikat Majikan] -  Mereka tidak boleh jadi ahli kesatuan sekerja dalaman (in-house union), di mana ahlinya adalah pekerja(employee) syarikat majikan. Mereka boleh jadi ahli kesatuan peringkat nasional, rantau atau negeri tetapi masih tidak dapat menikmati hak dalamm CBA. Jika kesatuan peringkat nasional, rantau atau negeriyang kini terhad kepada kesatuan berasaskan 'trade, occupation or industry' cuba 'organize' dan dapatkan pengiktirafan syarikat 'contractor for labour', ia hampir mustahil kerana 'contractor for labour' biasa membekalkan pekerja kepada beraneka jenis 'trade, occupation or industry' ...

    2 - Syarikat majikan, jika mereka tukar perniagaan kepada 'trade, occupation or industry' yang lain, kesatuan sekerja yang kini khusus untuk satu 'trade, occupation or industry' akan secara otomatis gagal terus wujud ditempat kerja tersebut....ahli kehilangan keahlian kesatuan...kesatuan sekerja tempat kerja tersebut terus luput....

    JUSTERU, SEKSYEN 26(1A) HARUS DIMANSUHKAN... 

    Azmin Ali dan beberapa Exco Selangor masih belum isytihar harta lagi?

    $
    0
    0
    Sedih sekali - masih tidak ada PERISYTIHARAN HARTA - layari Laman Web Kerajaan Selangor ini dan lihat exco mana yang telah membuat perisytiharan harta dan yang mana belum --- Azmin Ali sendiri belum lagi...http://www.selangor.gov.my/index.php/pages/view/90?mid=648



    Azmin dilapurkan kata “Ya, saya akan isytihar kepada umum.” - Bilakah kita boleh lihat pengistiharan harta ini? 

    Adakah Azmin Ali berikan gambar palsu mengenai perisytiharan harta MB dan Exco Selangor? MB sendiri nampaknya tak dedah?

    PERISYTIHARAN HARTA amat perlu khususnya bagi semua ahli Kabinet, dan Exco kerajaan negeri...

    PERISYTIHARAN HARTA ini perlu dibuat kepada rakyat 

    ...bukan hanya kepada Perdana Menteri, Menteri Besar dan/atau Ketua Menteri

    ...bukan hanya kepada MACC atau badan kerajaan 

    ....in Shah Alam.Responding to PKR vice-president Rafizi Ramli’s proposal concerning asset declaration, Azmin said the state government’s policy had gone beyond this....It was reported that asset declarations of Selangor state executive council (exco) members have been made public on the state government’s official website since 2009, a policy introduced by Azmin's predecessor, Abdul Khalid Ibrahim.- Malaysiakini, 30/11/2016

    MAKLUMAT DIPERLUKAN ADALAH:-

    Pendapatan Bulanan - bukan sahaja dari gaji MB atau Exco...tetapi semua pendapatan..

    Kepentingan dalam syarikat - saham yang dimiliki, jawatan dipegang >>> Mengapa kita tidak mahu kerajaan di bawah pengaruh PM atau MB memberikan projek atau kontrak kepada syarikat yang mereka ada kepentingan dalam...atau menarik projek dari syarikat lain... [Yang paling elok, adalah PM,MB,Kabinet, Exco Kerajaan ... tidak menjual beli kepentingan mereka dalam mana-mana syarikat, khususnya syarikat yang berurusan terus atau secara tidak terus dengan kerajaan atau mana-mana badan kerajaan..

    Tanah - kerajaan ada cadangan mahu membuat pembangunan besar di kawasan 'A'...sebelum itu PM,MB,Kabinet, Exco Kerajaan...dan/atau keluarga mereka terus pi membeli tanah dikawasan itu kerana tahu nilai tanah akan naik... Ini tak betul?

    Wang dalam akaun bank - ini kini perlu selepas duit berbillion masuk akaun peribadi Najib...justeru perlu elakkan rasuah atau perkara tak betul macam ini... justeru, perlu sangat kita tahu...

    MALU - tak mahu dedah? 'Jangan jaga tepi kain orang'? Right of Privacy? Transparensi memerlukan ahli politik berkuasa mendedahkan semua ini (dan mungkin lebih)...

    Dalam kes Azmin, beliau telah secara terbuka berkata akan dedah...berasaskan taksiran lapuran media dulu...

    RAKYAT memang marah dengan salah laku kerajaan UMNO-BN, dan apa yang diharapkan adalah kerajaan alternatif yang bersih, cekap, amanah...tidak menyalahgunakan kedudukan dalam kerajaan untuk mengaut keuntungan untuk diri sendiri, keluarga atau kroni...

    PERISYTIHARAN HARTA - sekali tak cukup...perlu dibuat setiap 1 tahun(cadangan)...justeru rakyat boleh pantau sama ada apa-apa salah laku berlaku....???

    Mengambil 'ikrar' atau buat 'sumpah' atau menandatangani perjanjian tak akan menyalahgunakan kedudukan dalam kerajaan atau ambil 'rasuah' - tak guna lagi ...tengok berapa ramai yang kena tangkap ambil rasuah?

    Cadangan Hannah Yeoh pada Ogos 2016 adalah baik - tetapi deklarasi kepada rakyat umum bukan deklarasi 'rahsia' untuk mata beberapa orang sahaja...

    Selangor state-assembly Speaker Hannah Yeoh had in August proposed an amendment to the Standing Orders which would require all Selangor state assemblypersons to declare their financial interests and assets. - Malaysiakini, 30/11/2016

     

      


     



     

     


     

    Kesatuan INFINEON Melaka bertahan? Mana penguatkuasaan undang-undang pekerja?

    $
    0
    0
    Satu cara bagaimana majikan mengugat semangat perjuangan  pekerja mereka adalah dengan menyerang kepimpinan pekerja. Jika pimpinan diserang dan dianiyai, maka setengah majikan percaya ahli kesatuan sekerja akan berasa 'takut' dan segala niat majikan kemungkinan akan seterusnya berjaya tanpa bantahan/halangan dari kesatuan atau pekerja

    Kesatuan sekerja adalah satu cara bagaimana pekerja bersatu dapat berinteraksi dengan majikan untuk menuntut hak lebih dan keadaan kerja yang lebih baik dan selamat. Pekerja bersatu juga boleh menangani apa-apa ketidakadilan yang dilakukan majikan. 

    TETAPI Bukan senang, bila dengan senang majikan boleh membuang kerja atau mengenakan tindakan disiplin kepada pemimpin, di mana ini akan menjana perasaan ketakutan di kalangan ahli lain - 'Jika majikan boleh lakukan gitu pada pemimpin, bagaimana pula saya?' 

    Ketakutan sedemikian akan secara lojik wujud - tetapi ini juga masa tekad dan solidariti pekerja dicabar.  Adakah 'solidariti' itu hanya cakap'kosong' bila keadaan baik - atau adakah Kesatuan dan pekerja akan tampil ke hadapan, sanggup ambil risiko, yang mungkin termasuk risiko kehilangan kerja atau risiko penangguhan kenaikan gaji, untuk berdiri bersama secara SOLIDARITI berjuang - lawan tetap lawan sehingga keadilan dicapai...Atau adakah 'kesatuan' dan 'solidariti' ini akan retak dan pecah gitu saja? Semua bergantung kepada ahli individu dan pimpinan kesatuan - prinsip, nilai, watak, personaliti...? 




    Syabas kepada Union di Infineon Melakadan ahli kesatuan tersebut yang BERTAHAN dan telah mengambil pendirian wajar secara solidariti - menuntut INFINEON Melaka membenarkan Presiden mereka(walaupun telah dibuang kerja secara salah) kembali  melakukan tugas dan tanggungjawab beliau. Berikut adalah petikan emel yang dihantar Setiausaha Kesatuan kepada Infineon Melaka...






    Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017...

    Assalamualaikum En Fazli,
                   
                    Saya sebagai Setiausaha Kesatuan ingin memaklumkan kepada pihak majikan bahawa untuk jawatan Presiden Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Infineon Technologies (M) Sdn. Bhd. masih lagi disandang oleh saudara Muhammad Zulfadlee Thye bin Abdullah.

                Setelah merujuk kepada MTUC Pusat dan berlandaskan undang-undang seperti yang tercatit di dalam Akta Perhubungan Perusahaan dan Akta Sekerja, maka saudara Zul Thye masih lagi layak memegang jawatan Presiden Kesatuan.

               Perkara ini juga telah dimaklumkan kepada Jabatan Hal Ehwal Kesatuan Sekerja (JHEKS). Maka dengan rasminya segala tugas-tugas Presiden Kesatuan masih lagi dijalankan oleh saudara Zul Thye termasuklah perbincangan CA yang akan datang. Kami juga berharap agar perbincangan CA yang akan datang dapat dibincangkan dengan secara harmoni.

    Sekian Terima Kasih.


    With Best Regards,
    Muhd Khairul Buang
    Infineon Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.
    (IFMY OP BE POM SO M4 UPS ASSY DB UT)

    Zulfadlee Thye

    Pendirian yang diambil Kesatuan ini harus dipuji. Tuntutan mereka adalah wajar dan berasaskan undang-undang. Bila seorang pekerja dibuang kerja, mendakwa bahawa pembuangan kerja itu salah dan menuntut kerja kembali, beliau akan terus kekal sebagai ahli kesatuan, dan terus memegang jawatan dalam Kesatuan tersebut - di dalam keadaan ini, Presiden Union...

    Malangnya, majikan Infineon Melaka terus menafikan hak Presiden Union ini meneruskan tanggungjawab sebagai Presiden Union...masuk pejabat Union pun dihalang secara salah oleh majikan berkenaan..

    MTUC juga telah membuat tuntutan yang sama - tetapi Infineon Melaka terus berkeras...menafikan hak Presiden dan Kesatuan tersebut..

    Kerajaan UMNO-BN sudah pun tahu bahawa salah laku bercanggah undang-undang sedang berlaku - mana dia penguatkuasaan undang-undang? 

    Kenapa Menteri Sumber Manusia, termasuk peguatkuasa Jabatan Perhubungan Manusia dan Pendaftar Kesatuan Sekerja masih belum bertindak...Sepatutnya cepat-cepat masuk, dan menuntut Infineon Melaka menuruti undang-undang negara - Presiden Kesatuan harus segera dibenarkan masuk dan meneruskan tugas sebagai Presiden...[Isu pembuangan kerja isu lain, boleh ikut proses sedia ada - tapi buat cepat sikit]. Isu kini adalah isu 'union busting ' dan isu penafian majikan membenarkan Presiden Union yang sah menjalankan tugas...Mana penguatkuasaan undang-undang...

    Mana penguatkuasaan undang-undang buruh dan Kesatuan Sekerja? Malas atau segaja tak prihatin kerana kerajaan tak prihatin hal ehwal pekerja  - Mungkin perlu buat aduan kepada EAIC (Suruhanjaya Integriti Agensi Penguatkuasaan) isu kegalan pihak penguatkuasa Kementerian Sumber Manusia?

    Penguatkuasaan undang-undang buruh juga harus dilakukan dengan cepat dan berkesan - Salah jika hanya menunggu pekerja dan/atau kesatuan sekerja bawa ke Mahkamah saja? 

    Bila sedar ada tindakan majikan bercanggah undang-undang negara, penguatkuasaan mesti dilaku segera...bukan berlenggah-lengah? Kadang-kadang ada aduan difailkan...kadang-kadang telah dapat tahu mengenai salah laku cara lain. Bila dapat tahu, dengan apa-apa cara pun, penguatkuasa Kementerian Sumber Manusia kena segera bertindak....? Apa kata Menteri - adakah pihak penguatkuasa undang-undang pekerja kurang efisyen? Adakah terdapat 'rasuah' yang menyebabkan pihak penguatkuasa melewatkan tindakan? 

    Rekod menunjukkan bahawa KEMENTERIAN semestinya sudah tahu mengenai salah-laku, bercanggah undang-undang negara, sejak sekurang-kurangnya Januari 2017...apa yang telah dilakukan?

    Pos berkaitan:-

    55 Groups - INFINEON MUST STOP UNION BUSTING AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST UNION LEADERS - Reinstate Union President?

    Malaysia: Workers claim discrimination against union leaders at Infineon's assembly factory; company responds (BHRRC)

    Perjuangan memerlukan lebih daripada satu kenyataan atau piket - juang sampai keadilan dicapai?

    ‘Wrongfully’ sacked workers union president turns to Suhakam for help(FMT,17/3/2017)

     



    Wan Noorulazhar - 5 years 7 months later wrongful dismisal case begins? Great injustice?

    $
    0
    0

    Wan Noorulazhar, employee of RENESAS, who was also the President of the Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region, Peninsular Malaysia (EIEUWR) was terminated wrongfully on 26/8/2011...and, at long last, his Industrial Court case has finally started ...trial now adjourned to 15-16 Mei 2017 now..

    'Wan Noorulazhar bin Mohd Hanafiah, an employee of RENESAS who is the President of the UNION was dismissed on 26/8/2011 by RENESAS whereby the alleged misconduct, was that his actions were ‘contrary to explicit company policies’. He allegedly made statements about treatment of workers in a closed Facebook Group, whose members were fellow workers.'

    87 Groups :- RENESAS MUST IMMEDIATELY ACCORD RECOGNITION TO THE UNION AND REINSTATE WAN NOORULAZHAR

    87 Kumpulan :-RENESAS HARUS SEGERA MENGIKTIRAF UNION DAN MENGEMBALIKAN PEKERJAAN WAN NOORULAZHAR

    Wan Noorulazhar, pekerja RENESAS yang juga Presiden UNION lah dibuang kerja pada 26/8/2011 oleh RENESAS...Aduan dan tuntutan menuntut kerja kembali telah difailkan, mengadu pembuangan kerja tak sah...

    Selepas pembuangan kerja - pekerja kehilangan kerja dan pendapatan bulanan...Majikan terus beroperasi saperti biasa..Adakah ini adil?

    Keadilan memerlukan kes sedemikian didengar dan diputuskan dengan cepat....tetapi di bawah kerajaan UMNO-BN...masa yang begitu lama berlalu sehingga kes ini dibicarakan di Mahkamah Perusahaan...

    Selepas 5 tahun 7 bulan (26 August 2011 - 10 April 2017), kes Wan Noorulazhar vs Renesas Semiconductor KL (M) Sdn Bhd telah bermula - kini kes ini akan disambung bicara pada 15 dan 16hb Mei 2017

    Adakah ini ADIL - sememangnya tidak?  Pekerja terus dianiyai...tetapi kerajaan UMNO-BN macam tak peduli...

    Adakah parti pembangkang akan membiarkan keadaan ini berterusan? Demi keadilan, kes ini harus segera dibicarakan dan diputuskan --- Mengapa? Pekerja menuntut kerja kembali - dan lagi cepat pekerja dapat kembali bekerja, adalah lebih adil bukan sahaja untuk pekerja tetapi juga majikan...

    Bila pemimpin kesatuan yang dimangsakan, ia semestinya menjejaskan kesatuan dan ahli kesatuan...Pekerja mungkin akan menjadi terlalu takut menentang majikan menuntut hak atau berjuang memastikan ketidakadilan segera berhenti...




    Kenyataan Media Bersama – 4 April 2013
    RENESAS HARUS SEGERA MENGIKTIRAF UNION
    DAN MENGEMBALIKAN PEKERJAAN WAN NOORULAZHAR
    Kami, 87 pertubuhan masyarakat sivil, kesatuan dan kumpulan  yang bertandatangan di bawah memanggil RENESAS Semiconductor KL Sdn Bhd (sebelum ini dikenali sebagai NEC Semiconductors (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd] untuk menghormati kebebasan berasosiasi dan hak pengiktirafan efektif untuk adakan collective bargaining,  yang merupakan satu hak asasi pekerja yang juga satu daripada nilai asas  International Labour Organisation (ILO)'s. RENESAS mesti berhenti tindakan menghalang atau melewatkan, dan segera memberikan pengiktirafan kepada  Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Barat Semenjung Malaysia(KSIEWBSM)/ Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region, Peninsular Malaysia (EIEUWR)[UNION]  supaya pekerja di RENESAS boleh akhirnya mula menikmati faedah collective bargaining agreement.  Kini sudah lebih 3 tahun sejak UNION mula menuntut  pengiktirafan RENESAS pada January 2010. 
    Di Malaysia, setelah didaftarkan, pengiktirafan majikan diperlukan sebelum UNION dapat mula berunding dan memasuki apa-apa  Collective Bargaining Agreement  dengan syarikat majikan. UNION perlu menghantar tuntutan pengiktirafan, dan dalam masa 21 hari majikan boleh mengiktiraf atau tidak. Jika pengiktirafan tidak diberikan, pihak Director General of Industrial Relations (DGIR) akan mencelah dan memulakan proses ke arah mengadakan undi sulit (secret ballot) untuk mendapat kepastian bahawa sekurang-kurangnya  50 peratus campur 1 jumlah pekerja yang berkelayakan menjadi ahli UNION mahukan kesatuan – lepas itu Union akan diberikan pengiktirafan dan boleh mula merepresentasi pekerja dengan berkesan.  

    Walaupun lebih kurang 70% (1,300) pekerja RENESAS yang ada kelayakan menjadi ahli Union sudah menjadi ahli EIEUWR pada masa permohonan pertama untuk pengiktirafan di buat oleh UNION kepada RENESAS, RENESAS tidak member pengiktirafan dan kini selepas 3 tahun, RENESAS masih enggan mengiktiraf union. 

    Pada 18/1/2010, UNION menghantarserahkan permohonan pertama(1) untuk pengiktirafan kepada  RENESAS. Respon RENESAS adalah bahawa ada sebuah jawatankuasa protem in-house union lain yang juga meminta pengiktirafan. Director General of Industrial Relations (DGIR) menolak alasan ini. Kemudian RENESAS mendakwa pula bahawa mereka tidak menerima permohonan pengiktirafan, walaupun permohonan pertama ini telah di hantarserah kepada RENESAS oleh Wan Noorulazhar bin Mohd Hanafiah, Presiden UNION, dan RENESAS telah mengesahkan penerimaan. Pihak DGIR akhirnya meminta  UNION untuk hantar lagi permohonan untuk pengiktirafan. 

    Tuntutan kedua(2) untuk pengiktirafan telah di hantar pada 17/8/2010, kali ini mengunakan pos berdaftar akuan terima, di mana sekali lagi RENESAS mendakwa tidak menerima permohonan  UNION. Malangnya, UNION juga tidak menerima kembali kad akuan terima dari pihak pos.

    Tuntutan ketiga(3) telah dihantar kepada RENESAS pada 8/10/2010, kali ini mengunakan Kourier Nasional Poslaju. Selepas menerima surat UNION, RENESAS  telah secara salah cuba menghantar surat UNION kembali kepada Poslaju dengan permintaan surat dikembalikan kepada UNION. Poslaju telah memberikan surat mengesahkan perkara ini. Kali ini, RENESAS tidak boleh lagi menafikan penerimaan, dan sepatutnya pihak DGIR mula melakukan apa yang perlu untuk tujuan mengadakan undi sulit. Tidak ada apa-apa tindakan di pihak DGIR walaupun UNION berkali-kali menuntut tindakan, dan akhirnya UNION terpaksa berpiket pada 12/8/2011 di hadapan Kementerian Sumber Manusia di Putrajaya. DGIR kemudian memberitahu UNION bahawa document relevan hilang/salah letak, dan Timbalan DGIR dipertanggungjawabkan untuk kesalahan tersebut, di mana beliau sejak itu itu ditukar jawatan. Pihak DGIR kemudian meminta pihak UNION untuk membuat satu lagi permohonan pengiktirafan.

    Tuntutan keempat(4) dibuat pada 8/9/2011. RENESAS kali ini membalas dengan mencabar, antara lain, pendaftaran UNION  EIEUWR itu sendiri, dan kelayakkan Setiausaha Agung UNION (General Secretary), iaitu  Bruno Gentil Pereira. Bila Menteri menolak bantahan ini pada 9/4/2012, pada 8/5/2012, RENESAS membuat permohonan kepada Mahkamah Tinggi mencabar keputusan Menteri, di mana Mahkamah Tinggi telah menolak permohonan RENESAS pada 28/6/2012. Selepas itu,  RENESAS, merayu kepada Mahkamah Rayuan, yang juga sebulat suara menolak rayuan RENESAS pada 5/12/2012.
    Selepas Mahkamah Tinggi menolak permohonan RENESAS pada 28/6/2012, tidak wujud apa-apa perintah Mahmah menghalang pihak DGIR meneruskan dengan proses undi sulit tetapi DGIR tidak berbuat apa-apa.

    Selepas banyak protes daripada UNION, DGIR akhirnya pada 14/12/2012 memulakan proses dengan menulis surat kepada RENESAS meminta mereka menghantarserahkan Borang B, sebagaimana diperlukan undang-undang. RENESAS tidak menghantar Borang B, dan surat kedua bertarikh 14/1/2013 telah dihantar oleh DGIR kepada RENESAS. RENESAS tidak melakukan apa yang diperlukan, dan kini pihak DGIR dipercayai sudah menghantar surat ketiga.

    Bila akhirnya sampai tarikh undi sulit, pekerja yang berhak mengundi adalah pekerja yang layak pada tarikh tuntutan pengiktirafan dihantarserah, iaitu 8/9/2011 tetapi dengan kehadiran kontrak kerja jangka pendek, ramai pekerja yang sokong UNION pada masa itu sudah tidak lagi berada  di RENESAS, di mana ini akan memprejudis UNION, yang masih perlu menunjukkan  sokongan dengan memperolehi undi sekurang-kurangnya 50% campur satu berdasarkan senarai pekerja layak pada 8/9/2011. Taktik melambatkan proses undi sulit menguntungkan pihak majikan, dan memprejudiskan UNION. 

    Wan Noorulazhar, pekerja RENESAS yang juga Presiden UNION lah dibuang kerja pada 26/8/2011 oleh RENESAS di mana kesalahan yang didakwa majikan adalah bahawa beliau telah melakukan tindakan bercanggah dengan polisi khusus syarikat ‘contrary to explicit company policies’. Beliau didakwa membuat kenyataan mengenai cara RENESAS melayan pekerja di dalam sebuah kumpulan Facebook tertutup, di mana ahli kumpulan itu ada rakan pekerja. Salahlaku ini langsung tidak ada kena mengena dengan  work performance. Kes pembuangan kerja secara salah kini di Mahkaman Perusahaan. 

    Trend masa kini Mahkamah Perusahaan adalah bila didapati pembuangan kerja secara salah dilakukan adalah untuk tidak memerintahkan pekerja diambil balik sebagai pekerja tetapi mengarahkan majikan membayar pampasan. Jika tidak diambil balik sebagai pekerja di RENESAS, pekerja di RENESAS akan kehilangan pemimpin. RENESAS sebenarnya boleh pada bila-bila masa mengambil kembali Wan Noorulazhar sebagai pekerja tanpa kehilangan faedah.



    Pada 14/3/2013, EIUWR bersama pekerja RENESAS telah sekali lagi mengadakan piket protes di Putrajaya.

    Kami menuntut RENESAS Semiconductor KL  Sdn  Bhd untuk segera mengiktiraf Electronic Industry Employees Union Western Region (EIEUWR), dan segera mengambil balik sebagai pekerja  Wan Noorulazhar bin Mohd Hanafiah dan mana-mana pemimpin pekerja yang telah dibuang kerja.

    Senator Syed Shahir bin Syed Mohamud
    Charles Hector
    Mohd Roszeli bin Majid
    Pranom Somwong
    Badrulzaman bin Mohd Ghazali

    Bagi pihak 87 organisasi di bawah,

    ALIRAN
    Andhra Pradesh State Domestic Workers' Union, India
    Asia Monitor Resource Centre(AMRC)
    Asia  Pacific  Forum on Women , Law and Development ( APWLD)
    Asia Floor Wage Alliance- SEA Office
    Building and Wood Workers International Asia Pacific Regional Office (BWI APRO)
    Center for Migrant Advocacy ,Philippines
    Centre for Human Rights and Development (CHRD) Sri Lanka
    Center for Orang  Asli Concerns (COAC)
    CIMS- Centre for Indian Migrant Studies
    Clean Clothes Campaign
    Committee for Asian Women, Bangkok
    Community Action Network (CAN), Malaysia
    Confederation of Free Trade Unions of India
    Dignity International
    GoodElectronics
    GoodElectronics Thailand (GET)
    Hope Workers' Center, Taiwan
    Hsinchu Catholic Diocese Migrants and Immigrants Service Center (HMISC), Taiwan
    Human Rights Ambassador for Salem-News.com
    IDWN( International  Domestic Workers’  Network)
    IMA Research Foundation, Bangladesh
    International Campaign for Responsible Technology, US
    International League of Peoples' Struggle – Canada
    Legal Support for Children and Women (LSCW), Cambodia
    LIPS (Lembaga Informasi Perburuhan Sedane/Sedane Labour Resource Centre) Indonesia
    MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
    Malaysian Physicians for Social Responsibility
    MAP Foundation, Thailand
    Maquiladora Health & Safety Support Network, Berkeley, CA  USA
    Migrant Care
    Migrant Forum in Asia (MFA)
    Migrant Forum India (MF India)
    Migrant Forum Lanka (MFL)
    Migrants Rights Council India
    Myanmar Ethnic Rohingya Human Rights Organization Malaysia (MERHROM)
    NAMM (Network of Action for Migrants in Malaysia)
    NDWM -  National Domestic Workers' Movement, India
    NLD-LA (National League for Democracy-Liberated Areas), Malaysia
    Pakistan Rural Workers Social Welfare Organization (PRWSWO)
    Parti Rakyat Malaysia(PRM)
    People & Planet, UK
    Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor & Wilayah Persekutuan (PERMAS)
    PINAY Quebec
    Progressive Labor Union of Domestic Workers- Hong Kong
    PSWS (Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor)
    Pusat KOMAS (KOMAS)
    Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit (RMMRU), Bangladesh
    SALT (School of Acting Justly Loving Tenderly and Walking Humbly)
    SBMI (Serikat Buruh Migran Indonesia)
    Solidarity of Cavite Workers (SCW), Philippines
    State Enterprises Workers' Relations Confederation (SERC), Thailand
    State Railway Workers' Union of Thailand (SRU), Thailand
    SUARAM (Suara Rakyat Malaysia)
    Tenaganita, Malaysia
    The Alliance of Progressive Labor - Hong Kong
    Tourism Employees Association of Maldives
    Women's Rehabilitation Center (WOREC) Nepal
    Workers Assistance Center, Inc, Philippines
    Workers Hub For Change (WH4C)
    Women Workers Lead
    Writer Alliance for Media Independence (WAMI)
    Youth For Peace/Peace Institute of Cambodia (YFP/PIC)
    Malaysian Unions
    Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Timur Semenanjung Malaysia (KSIEWTSM)
    Kesatuan Sekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Selatan Semenanjung Malaysia
    Kesatuan Sekerja Pekerja Industri Elektronik Wilayah Utara
    Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja MHS Aviation Berhad
    Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Polyplastics Asia Pacific
    Paper & Paper Products Manufacturing Employees' Union Of Malaysia (PPPMEU)
    TNBJOU (TNB Junior Officers Union), Malaysia
    Malayan Technical Services Union (MTSU)
    NUBE (National Union of Banking Employees), Malaysia
    Association of Maybank Executive
    Kesatuan Kebangsaan Pekerja Pekerja Perusahaan Alat Alat Pengangkutan Dan Sekutu(NUTEAIW)
    Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Dalam Perkhidmatan Perubatan Dan Kesihatan Swasta-[Union Of Employees In Private Medical And Health Services]
    Kesatuan Eksekutif Canon Opto (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd
    Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional Sdn.Bhd.
    Electrical Industry Workers' Union (EIWU)
    Kesatuan Pekerja Pekerja Fujikura Federal Cables Sdn Bhd
    Kesatuan Pekerja Pekerja Kelab Semenanjung Malaysia
    Kesatuan Eksekutif Airod (KEA)
    UNI Global Union-Malaysia
    MTUC Pahang
    MTUC Penang Division
    MTUC Bahagian Melaka
    Kongres Kesatuan Sekerja Cawangan Pulau Pinang
    MTUC Selangor & Wilayah Persekutuan

    Senator Syed Shahir bin Syed Mohamud - Senator in the Malaysian Parliament, the Immediate Past President of the Malaysian Trade Union Congress(MTUC), and Executive Secretary to the National Union of Transport Equipment and Allied Industries Workers; Charles Hector - human rights defender and lawyer; Mohd Roszeli bin Majid VicePresident (Private Sector) Malaysian Trade Union Congress(MTUC), and also the President of the TNB Junior Officers Union; Pranom Somwong - Workers Hub For Change(WH4C), Asia  Pacific  Forum on Women , Law and Development ( APWLD); Badrulzaman bin Mohd Ghazali -  President, Kesatuan Pekerja-Pekerja MHS Aviation Berhad(MHSEU)

    Jangan diskriminasi rakyat Malaysia dan hanya prihatin tentang keluarga 112,635 peneroka Felda?

    $
    0
    0
    Kerajaan harus jangan lupakan(atau diskriminasikan) mereka yang bukan peneroka FELDA...

    FELDA adalah program kerajaan - bukan hak milik peneroka dan/atau keluarga mereka - ia milik semua rakyat Malaysia

    Mereka yang miskin, tak ada tanah, sumber pendapatan dan kestabilan ekonomi telah dipilih dan bantu sejak 1956 - lebih kurang 112,635 peneroka Felda mendapat manfaat ini..dan sepatutnya kini sudah boleh berdikari...


    Federal Land Development Authority (FELDA) was established on July 1, 1956 under the Land Development Ordinance of 1956 for the development of land and relocation with the objective of poverty eradication through the cultivation of oil palm and rubber. ...In 1990, FELDA was no longer recruiting new settlers.

    Warga miskin, yang sanggup melakukan kerja bertanam getah, kelapa sawit dan koko(?) telah dipilih sejak tahun 1956 sehingga tahun 1990. [Lihat pos sebelum ini:- Should the 1956 FELDA Scheme to help the poor be re-introduced?

    Yang dipilih diberikan kawasan tanah untuk bertanam tanamanan yang ditetapkan - semasa pokok tumbuh, menunggu masa hasil dikeluarkan, program FELDA ini memberi bantuan kewangan menyara diri peneroka dan keluarga ... Selain daripada kawasan tanaman, tanah tambahana  diberikan untuk membina rumah tempat tinggal.  
    Felda eventually developed 317 schemes on some 811,000 ha (89 percent oil palm and 10 percent rubber) for 112,635 settlers
    Wang rakyat Malaysia banyak dibelanjakan untuk lebih kurang 112,635 peneroka Felda ini. Apa yang peneroka membayar kembali, saya percaya, jauh kurang daripada apa yang telah dibelanjakan untuk setiap satu peneroka ini.. 

    Setelah membayar kembali 'hutang' - peneroka Felda juga telah diberikan tanah ladang (serta rumah) berkenaan secara peribadi...{Pada mulanya, tanah ini tidak akan dipindahmilik kepada nama peribadi peneroka - tetapi kekal secara tanah bersama/kolektif komuniti Felda setempat, tetapi hasil desakkan peneroka, tanah kini dipindahmilik kepada nama individu peneroka...). 

    Tanah FELDA berbeda daripada tanah lain, kerana satu syarat pemilikan adalah bahawa peneroka akan terus tanam tanaman getah/kelapa sawit - dan tanah ini tidak boleh dijual kepada pihak ketiga, dan seterus bila peneroka meninggal dunia ianya dibenarkan pindah milik kepada hanya 1-2 waris dengan syarat usaha tanaman diteruskan. Jika peneroka atau waris nak jual pun, saya percaya hanya boleh dijual kembali kepada FELDA sahaja..

    Akhir program, setiap peneroka dan keluarga kini sudah memiliki cara untuk terus mendapat pendapatan... (tanah, berserta bantuan pertanian yang disediakan) Mereka terlepas daripada 'kemiskinan' ...

    Program UMNO-BN ini, yang saya anggap berjaya...TETAPI program ini dihentikan pada tahun 1990. Sepatutnya, mengikut pendapat saya, ianya harus diteruskan, supaya lebih ramai yang miskin boleh dibantu supaya mereka sekeluarga akan akhirnya memiliki tanah dan mempunyai cara pasti mendapat pendapatan berterusan...

    Selain daripada, tanah, rumah, bantuan uruskan tanaman dan hasil tanaman, wang rakyat juga digunakan untuk membina infrastruktur, bandar, hospital, dll..Anak peneroka juga telah dibantu berkenaan pendidikan, biasiswa serta untuk setengah 'pekerjaan'. Peneroka juga telah diajar menubuhkan 'koperasi'...dan berlabur...

    Patutkah anak-anak peneroka FELDA kini terus 'dibantu'? Mengikut pendapat saya, tak perlu lagi bantuan 'istemewa' tetapi bantuan sama yang diberikan kepada semua rakyat Malaysia...Harus juga diingat, bahawa ada ramai lagi 'warga miskin' di Malaysia yang harus kita tumpukan perhatian...

    Harus diingat juga FELDA milik rakyat Malaysia - Peneroka Felda dan keluarga mereka kini sudah tidak lagi miskin dan mempunyai masa depan yang baik ...Tetapi, apa yang dilakukan selepas ini juga penting - mereka perlu berdiri atas kaki sendiri dan sendiri terus berusaha...

    Jika ada tanah pertanian, yang akan terus menjana pendapatan ...ada Koperasi yang boleh juga membantu...semua akan OK -- tetapi, jika malas kerja biasalah... Kerja kena dilakukan sendiri, dan mungkin juga bersama peneroka Felda yang lain ...tetapi jika hanya mahu 'outsourcing' kerja di ladang kepada 'pihak ketiga'(yang perlu dibayar 'upah' sahaja..pendapatan hasil tanah, tanaman dan pelaburan yang peneroka sekeluarga terima pun pasti kurang...

    FELDA juga mempunyai hakmilik FELDA sendiri - ini bukan milik peneroka tetapi rakyat Malaysia. FGV(Felda Global Ventures), pula bukan lagi milik FELDA sepenuhnya tetapi pemilik saham...kerana siapa-siapa pun boleh beli saham...mungkin peneroka ada saham(berapa tak pasti), tetapi hak mereka kekal sebagai hak pemilik saham - lebih baik jangan gunakan nama 'FELDA' kerana ini juga mengelirukan rakyat. Siapa pemilik saham FGV - adakah kerajaan masih memiliki lebih 50% saham...atau sudah hilang 'control' dan kini milik pihak ketiga...banyak syarikat milik kerajaan (atau syarikat yang kerajan mempunyai kawalan kerana lebih 50% milik kerajaan) telah sedikit demi sedikit di bawah kerajaan UMNO-BN pergi kepada pihak ketiga (mungkin juga warga asing atau syarikat negara lain?)..

    Saperti yang dikatakan, kawasan di mana peneroka Felda (lebih kurang 112,000 dan keluarga mereka ..kini campur isteri/suami dan anak-anak/cucu mungkin sudah menjadi 1 juta lebih pengundi) hasil daripada cara kawasan pilihanraya dipecahkan, sudah menjadi penting untuk PRU akan datang - Justeru UMNO-BN serta parti pembangkang memberikan banyak fokus kepada kawasan 'FELDA'...tapi jangan lupa rakyat Malaysia yang lain, di mana kini jumlah penduduk lebih 30 juta orang...

     

    FELDA adalah asalnya program kerajaan untuk membantu rakyat miskin, yang tak ada tanah dan pendapatan memadai, untuk berdikari dan akhirnya menjadi rakyat yang tidak lagi miskin. Berbanding dengan BRIM, yang sebenarnya boleh dikatakan hanya 'sedekah' atau bantuan kewangan sementara membantu yang miskin dan/atau yang memerlukan, FELDA, pada asalnya, ada program membebaskan rakyat daripada kemiskinan yang sustainable...

    Ia bukan program beri ikan untuk yang miskin - tetapi program yang mengajar yang miskin bagaimana dengan sendiri menangkap ikan yang juga memberikan mereka kepada akses perlu untuk mendapatkan penegetahuan perlu untuk menangkap ikan sendiri dan terus mendapatkan pendapatan perlu - tak perlu lagi perlu bergantung kepada 'kerajaan' atau siapa-siapa...

    Justeru, rakyat miskin yang mempunyai kelayakkan, telah ditawarkan dengan peluang ini....tanah diagihkan kepada mereka untuk ditanam getah/kelapa/sawit/dll, mereka diberi pengetahuan dan latihan bagaimana menanam dan menjaga tanaman berkenaan, mereka dibantu juga dengan memberikan akses untuk jentera perlu, baja dan racun...dan untuk jangkamasa mereka menunggu tanaman mereka memberikan hasil, mereka juga telah diberikan bantuan kewangan bulanan untuk sara diri. Peneroka bukan sahaja diberikan tanah untuk bertanam, tetapi juga tanah untuk rumah untuk mereka tinggal. Bila tanaman mereka mula berhasil. ianya dibeli oleh FELDA/kerajaan dan/atau pihak ketiga...

    Program asal FELDA terhenti pada lebih kurang 1990 - tak ada lagi orang miskin baru yang dibantu secara 'sustainable'... Kini, UMNO-BN kembali gunakan taktik 'beri ikan' sahaja...kebergantungan rakyat kepada 'hati baik' PM dan kerajaan diteruskan - kerajaan UMNO-BN kini tak mahu rakyat 'berdikari' - Mengapa? Mungkin taktik terus mendapat sokongan semasa PRU? Ini salah - sebab rakyat yang bergantung kepada 'kerajaan semasa' - tak BEBAS - tak bebas undi untuk kebaikkan semua di Malaysia kerana takut hilang 'sedekah'(bantuan/BR1M/dll)...Penjawat awam, ramai takut sokong selain daripada kerajaan semasa kerana takut hilang kerja ...kesan kepada kenaikkan pangkat/gaji. Rakyat, jika berterusan begini, tidak BEBAS...mereka sudah jadi 'hamba' kerajaan semasa...apa yang kita mahukan adalah kerajaan yang membantu rakyat berdikari dan BEBAS...Kerajaan adalah 'wakil rakyat' yang diberi amanah berkhidmat untuk kita semua ...bukan bertindak hanya untuk kepentingan diri atau untuk hanya kekal berkuasa..



     
     






     



    Monday, 17 April 2017

    Felda’s affordable housing scheme to take off this year

    When StarBiz caught up with him last week, Shahrir had just conducted a series of meetings with not only Felda’s employees but ministers. “The first 100 days have been interesting and rewarding for me. Felda is about land reform and our model is unique. I accepted the job because making the land reform model work resonates with me,” he said
    When StarBiz caught up with him last week, Shahrir had just conducted a series of meetings with not only Felda’s employees but ministers. “The first 100 days have been interesting and rewarding for me. Felda is about land reform and our model is unique. I accepted the job because making the land reform model work resonates with me,” he said

    KUALA LUMPUR: The Federal Land Development Authority (Felda) has to return to its roots or balik asal and do more to represent the interests of its 112,000 settlers as a land reform agency, according to chairman Tan Sri Shahrir Abdul Samad.

    The Johor Baru MP was said to have been reluctant to take up the chairmanship at Felda in the beginning. However, he was persuaded to assume the reponsibility following the Prime Minister’s encouragement as well as by the mandate of carrying out Felda’s inititatives.

    Shahrir is known to drop by his office in Menara Felda here even during the weekends to go over the agency’s affairs and formulate policy decisions in addition to his current responsibilities as MP.

    When StarBiz caught up with him last week, Shahrir had just conducted a series of meetings with not only Felda’s employees but ministers.

    “The first 100 days have been interesting and rewarding for me. Felda is about land reform and our model is unique. I accepted the job because making the land reform model work resonates with me,” he said.

    Shahrir described the balik asal concept as returning Felda to its glory days.

    “This means going back to being good at your job, and understanding that you should perform. We want to be seen as a great organisation and we want to be in touch with the people and communities,” he said.

    The back to the roots philosophy will be the thrust for the agency’s new affordable housing policy as it aims to provide 20,000 houses under a new housing scheme to be carried out in partnership with Syarikat Perumahan Negara Bhd (SPNB).

    The terms for the settlers are generous as they only need to pay RM270 a month for a 1,000 sq ft house over a 25-year period under a similar model as SPNB’s existing rumah mesra rakyat scheme. Second generation Felda settlers will be eligible to apply and the houses will be offered via a balloting process.

    “In previous housing schemes Felda used to do everything by itself. There are some problems by doing this because it then became contractor-driven and at the same time we forgot about the state having to get involved too because land is a state matter.

    “To avoid delays, we decided to do this as a programme, not just as something that is part of the group’s profit and loss,” he explained.

    Under the new arrangement, Felda will set aside land as part of the Group Settlement Act. The houses are estimated to cost around RM45,000 each with additional charges relating to the land plots.

    The agency will also subsidise the substantial infrastructure costs for the new housing areas.

    SPNB already has a project in Sungai Sayong, Johor in a Felda scheme, Shahrir pointed out.

    “In a rural context, there is an issue with people having a pay sheet. Some do not have a fixed income or an EPF account. Since banks may not be able to give out loans, SPNB will deal with the payment collection and sort of finance the settlers,” he said.

    Aside form an existing government subsidy amounting to RM200mil, the endeavour is estimated to cost Felda about RM500mil a year. Shahrir said this year would be crucial for the agency as it plans to roll out several pilot projects and explore potential avenues for financing.

    “We may consider a long-term sukuk. Bear in mind we did not get government allocations for 20 years up until last year. We are confident of funding this project,” Shahrir said. - Star, 17/4/2017

    Malaysian Airlines - Secret Ballot for Union Recognition after MAB fails to accord recognition to NUFAM?

    $
    0
    0
    Flight attendants at Malaysian Airlines are having their secret ballot to gain recognition from Malaysian Airlines - 19, 20, 21,25 and 26th April 2017.  



    About 1,900 flight attendants are qualified and will be voting -National Union of Flight Attendants Malaysia (NUFAM)needs more than 950 flight attendants to come and vote for the UNION (remember those who do not manage to vote, even if they are for the union, will be considered as having voted against the Union)

    Malaysian Airlines now owned by the new company Malaysian Airlines Berhad(MAB), has rejected the recognition of NUFAM, a union representing flight attendants in the Malaysian Airlines and other airlines in the country. Now because of this rejection, the 'secret ballot' is ongoing, and if more than 50% of all employees(who qualify to be in this union) come and vote in favour, then  the Minister will 'order' that MAB recognize NUFAM as the union representing flight attendants in Malaysian Airlines...

    SAD - that MAB,100% owned by the UMNO-BN Malaysian government, who came into being to take over Malaysian Airlines from Malaysian Airlines System Berhad(another wholly owned Malaysian government company),has objected to NUFAM's application for recognition, which has now forced this 'secret ballot'. 

    Why did the Malaysian Airlines just not accord recognition to NUFAM - something that any worker rights respecting employer would have done? Why delay workers the right to a 'recognized union"? Remember, that in Malaysia only after the employer company recognizes the trade union, can the trade union start discussions and sign a Collective Bargaining Agreement with the employer...

    The 'secret ballot' process is also very unjust. Why? Well, all those that could not turn up to vote would be considered as being against the union, even if they really are for the union. So, if there were 100 qualified flight attendants entitled to be members of the union, and 49 only managed to turn up and vote, and they all all voted in favour of the Union - they will still lose, because the 51 who never managed to turn up will be deemed to have voted against the union...so unfair and unjust. [We are talking about flight attendants here, and they are flying all over the world as part of their work - hence, it will be difficult for all of them to turn up and vote....]

    More than 50% - What if 40% wanted the union - why should they be denied the right to a Collective Bargaining Agreement between their union, NUFAM, and Malaysian Airlines. Surely, a more just percentage should be 20%.

    Why reduce to 20%? Well, nowadays many employees are precarious employees, i.e. on 'short-term contracts' - and these may not be so interested in a Union or Collective Bargaining Agreements, since by the time the Agreement finally comes into effect, these employees may no more be in the employer company. Different in the past, when almost 95% of the employees are regular employees - permanent employment until retirement...? Today, to still insist on more than 50% is absurd - it should be reduced to 20%.

    MALAYSIAN AIRLINES have an history of union busting and anti-union behavior...

    * Remember, how the Airlines Employees Union (a national union representing employees of all airlines) was deregistered, and its leaders were arrested under the Internal Security Act(ISA) in 1978-79 following an industrial action of Malaysian Airlines Employees.


    * Effectively, the UMNO-BN government destroyed the then national trade union - which subsequently was replaced by a more 'docile' in-house union, MASEU (Malaysian Airline System Employees' Union Peninsular Malaysia) and several other in-house unions. Then all these in-house unions were effectively 'extinguished' when Malaysian Airlines was handed over to a new company, Malaysian Airlines Berhad(MAB). Being in-house unions, this meant that all these unions must be formed and registered all over again. The only union that survived this transfer of assets to another company was NUFAM (a new national union). 

    To facilitate the transfer, or more likely to prevent existing liabilities of the old company being made liabilities of the new company, an Act of Parliament was passed. They could have had provisions in this new law that allowed existing in-house unions to simply change their name and continue to be the union of the employees of the new company - but that clearly was not the UMNO-BN government's intention...so all in-house unions effectively 'killed'..

    *NUFAM tried to get recognition of Malaysian Airlines System - Well, Malaysian Airlines Systems, was not for trade unions - also objected to recognition of NUFAM, forcing also a 'secret ballot' that resulted in favour of NUFAM -62.73% of all qualified employees indicated that they were with NUFAM. Even after, the relevant Minister decided that NUFAM be accorded recognition,Malaysian Airlines System Berhad challenged the Minister's decision in court..., and of course, it all 'ended' when all assets of Malaysian Airlines System Berhad was transferred to the new company,Malaysian Airlines Berhad(MAB)


    See earlier post:-

    MAS must withdraw the legal suit challenging the recognition of NUFAM - members need their Union during this precarious period in MAS.

    * Will the flight attendants at Malaysian Airlines finally have a recognized union? Or will this right to a recognized union still be delayed....It really all depends on the UMNO-BN government of Malaysia as this is still a wholly government-owned company...


    See earlier posts:-

    54 groups and unions:- Malaysian Airlines Must Respect Trade Union and Worker Rights Cease Anti-Union activities against NUFAM and its members

    47 Groups :- WORKER AND TRADE UNION RIGHTS MUST BE PRIORITIZED FOR THE WELLBEING OF THE WORKER AND THEIR FAMILIES

     

     

     



    Sistem Insurans Pekerjaan (SIP) - Bayaran bulanan kepada pekerja yang hilang kerja? Bukan untuk bantu jelas hutang majikan kepada pekerja?

    $
    0
    0

    Sistem Insurans Pekerjaan (SIP) akhirnya akan dilaksanakan di Malaysia tak lama lagi ...tetapi jangan terlalu gembira lagi kerana kerajaan UMNO-BN bukan boleh dipercayai sangat. 

    Initiatif membantu pekerja tak ada kerja(termasuk juga yang kehilangan kerja) pernah dahulu diberikan harapan - tetapi akhirnya ia disalurkan kebanyakkan kepada majikan dan pihak ketiga - untuk memberikan latihan perlu kepada pekerja supaya dapat pekerjaan kembali - program baru dibawah Skima Pembangunan Sumber Manusia [Human Resource Development Scheme). Majikan diberikan kewangan untuk melakukan ini. Satu program latihan pekerja yang lain pula ada memberikan pekerja elaun RM500 atau kurang semasa jalankan latihan. 

    Apakah sebenarnya Sistem Insurans Pekerjaan (SIP) yang akhirnya diluluskan PM Najib? Intipati skim ini tidak dinyatakan dengan jelas di mana-mana, dan nyata ramai ada pemikiran berlainan mengenai apakah skima ini.

    Berdasarkan lapuran media, PERKESO dan KERAJAAN

    - Akan memberikan bantuan kewangan kepada pekerja warganegara Malaysia yang kehilangan pekerjaan. [Perkeso pula kata ianya akan diberikan kepada mereka yang kehilangan kerja dan yang telah memberikan sumbangan kepada PERKESO/SOCSO)

    "Pekerja akan mendapat bantuan saraan sementara dan mencari pekerjaan baharu melalui program perkhidmatan pekerjaan...the scheme was expected to provide aid to laid-off workers who are looking for another job and who contribute to Socso. - Deputy Human Resources Minister Ismail Muttalib.

    - Akan diberikan juga kepada mereka yang meninggalkan kerja (resign)

    ...Ismail said the under-employed people quit jobs to get better jobs and the insurance scheme would also include them...

    - Untuk pekerja sektor swasta sahaja (mengapa tidak termasuk pekerja sektor awam juga - yang boleh juga kini kehilangan kerja. Ramai kini digaji sebagai pekerja kontrak jangka pendek. Pekerja sektor awam juga boleh kehilangan kerja termasuk juga melalui 'retrenchment'...

    Sistem Insurans Pekerjaan (SIP) yang bakal dinikmati 6.5 juta pekerja tempatan dalam sektor swasta dengan jangkaan bayaran faedah boleh dibuat mulai 1 Januari 2019.

    Kerajaan patut membantu semua pekerja yang kehilangan kerja, dalam apa cara pun termasuk sama ada mereka telah sendiri meletak jawatan. Pekerja yang meletak jawatan tanpa mempunyai kerja lain yang menunggu berbuat demikian kerana keadaan kerja tidak baik (mungkin ada diskriminasi, hasutan, ganguan seksual, penipuan oleh majikan, termasuk juga mereka yang terpaksa kerana tak ada pilihan lain...). Kadar bantuan klas ini mungkin lebih rendah daripada mereka yang dibuang kerja akibat 'retrenchment' atau dibuang kerja atas alasan disiplin(yang mungkin juga 'union busting). Modal Negara Thai adalah baik( sila lihat post:-  Malaysian workers want UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS just like Thailand?)

    MASALAH LAIN YANG HARUS DISELESAIKAN - Tetapi bukan melalui 'Skim Insurans Pekerjaan'...

    - Masalah ramai syarikat majikan muflis dan masih berhutang kepada pekerja ...mungkin gaji dan OT berbulan-bulan, serta juga Faedah Henti Kerja. Ini adalah hutang majikan kepada pekerja - di mana, kerajaan yang sepatutnya memastikan semua majikan menjelaskan keberhutangan pekerja(khususnya mereka yang bergaji RM5000 sebulan atau kurang - Akta Kerja 1955).

    - Majikan yang selalu melepaskan diri adalah majikan yang merupakan SYARIKAT...di mana undang-undang kini tidak membenarkan Pengarah Syarikat, CEO dan/atau Pemilik syarikat dikejar untuk menjelaskan hutang syarikat kepada pekerja yang tertunggak...[Tetapi jika Majikan merupakan PEMILIK TUNGGAL(Sole Proprietor) atau PERKONGSIAN(Partnership) - setiap pemilik dan 'partner' boleh dikejar secara peribadi untuk mendapatkan apa yang terhutang kepada pekerja]. Pengarah dan Pemilik Syarikat, selepas syarikat 'muflis'(digulung) kekal kaya raya...

    - Justeru, undang-undang syarikat harus dipinda, supaya pekerja dibenarkan terus mengejar Pengarah dan Pemilik Saham secara peribadi untuk mendapatkan apa yang masih Syarikat Majikan berhutang kepada mereka. [Jika syarikat membuat pinjaman dari Bank, Bank biasa menuntut Jaminan Peribadi daripada Pengarah Syarikat - justeru jika 'syarikat' tak ada duit, Bank boleh mengejar Pengarah secara peribadi untuk dapatkan apa yang masih syarikat hutang kepada bank...]. Justeru, mengapa pekerja juga tidak dibenarkan mengejar individu ini secara peribadi untuk mendapatkan balik apa yang mereka hutang pekerja...rumah pengarah atau BMW mereka boleh dijual dan wang itu boleh  digunakan untuk bayar keberhutangan kepada pekerja...

    - Bila majikan tak bayar gaji/elaun - serta merta pihak penguatkuasa boleh masuk dan memastikan majikan segera membayar...Kegagalan pegawai penguatkuasa hak pekerja Kementerian Sumber Manusia bertindak dengan segera yang membawa kepada situasi ramai syarikat yang sudah tutup masih berhutang kepada pekerja..

    - Jika syarikat majikan dipercayai mahu cabut tak bayar keberhutangan mereka kepada pekerja, pekerja juga boleh segera pergi ke Mahkamah Magistret dan/atau Mahkamah Tinggi dapatkan perintah tahan akaun syarikat(dan/atau harta syarikat dilupuskan) sehingga majikan menjelaskan keberhutangan mereka. Mahkamah juga ada kuasa untuk minta Majikan mendeposit wang sekuriti di Mahkamah...Malangnya ramai pekerja serta Kesatuan Sekerja tidak gunakan cara ini...apa yang kini dibuat adalah aduan/tuntutan di Kementerian Sumber Manusia - tetapi malangnya kelewatan Jabatan Kerajaan ini menjalankan tugas...membenarkan majikan 'cabut lari' ...[Mungkin juga ada elemen 'rasuah'?]...

    MASALAH KINI, adalah setengah NGO dan juga Kesatuan Sekerja nampaknya keliru dan mahukan Skim Insuran Pekerjaan ini menjelaskan keberhutangan tertunggak majikan kepada pekerja...faedah henti kerja/dll. SAYA TAK SETUJU. Kenapa pula mahu bantu 'Majikan'? Tak lojik juga jika pekerja diminta membayar untuk skim insuran yang membantu melupuskan keberhutangan majikan kepada pekerja...

    SKIM INSURAN PEKERJAAN - hanya harus digunakan untuk membayar pekerja yang hilang pekerjaan sejumlah wang setiap bulan(di Thailand, ianya adalah 50% gaji bulanan atau RM1,500, yang mana kurang) untuk jangkamasa tertentu(di Thailand, skim ini hanya membuat bayaran untuk tempuh maksima 6 bulan sahaja atau sehingga mereka dapat kerja baru). Harus diingat, skim ini membantu pekerja dari segi pendapatan bulanan perlu sehingga mereka mendapat kerja baru. Pekerja pada masa yang sama perlu buktikan usaha mencari kerja, dll...Kita tak mahu pekerja sengaja malas cari kerja baru kerana mahu dapatkan bayaran maksima untuk 6 bulan.

    Bantuan kewangan sedemikian perlu kerana tiap-tiap bulan, pekerja terpaksa membayar bil letrik, air, talipon, pembetungan, internet, sewa rumah, bayaran pinjaman, dll - Kalau tak ada pendapatan, susah pekerja sekeluarga ...dan mungkin mereka akan akhirnya kehilangan semua sekali...kalau tak dapat kerja cepat... 

    BANTUAN GUAMAN PERCUMA - kini boleh diperolehi oleh pekerja di Pusat Bantuan Guaman Majlis Peguam, yang terdapat di semua Negeri. Bantuan akan diberikan saperti nasihat guaman percuma, bantuan menyediakan tuntutan yang perlu difailkan di Jabatan Sumber Manusia/KWSP/PERKESO/dll, serta juga peguam untuk bertindak dalam kes pekerja, untuk pekerja yang berkelayakkan - di mana pekerja bergaji RM5,000 kebawah kemungkinan besar layak. Resolution for Provision of Legal Aid for Workers adopted in Malaysian Bar AGM

    Kesatuan Sekerja dan MTUC juga boleh membantu - tetapi masalah kini caj yang dikenakan setengah Kesatuan mungkin masih tinggi.

    Yayasan Bantuan Guaman Kebangsaan (YBGK) pada masa ini hanya menyediakan bantuan untuk kes jenayah dan jenayah Syariah - Mungkin kerajaan UMNO-BN boleh juga melebarkan skop untuk memberi bantuan kepada kes hak pekerja dan kesatuan sekerja...

    Insurance scheme to help those who lose jobs

    Minderjeet Kaur
     | March 9, 2017 
    The Employee Insurance Scheme is expected to be undertaken by Socso and implemented in 2018.

    DEWAN RAKYAT
    Ismail-Muttalib

    KUALA LUMPUR: The Employee Insurance Scheme (EIS) to give out financial aid to jobless Malaysians is expected to be implemented next year, says Deputy Human Resources Minister Ismail Muttalib.

    He said the scheme would be run by the Social Security Organisation (Socso).

    “The National Economic Council passed the scheme on Jan 9. It will be discussed by the cabinet as soon as possible.

    “The law providing this is expected to be tabled this year for implementation in 2018,” Ismail said during the question-and-answer session in the Dewan Rakyat.

    He said the scheme was expected to provide aid to laid-off workers who are looking for another job and who contribute to Socso.

    Ismail was answering a question by Abdullah Sani Abdul Hamid (PKR -Kuala Langat).

    Sani urged the ministry to implement the scheme as soon as possible as some of the poorer countries such as Vietnam had implemented the scheme several years ago.

    Another backbencher, Jasin MP Ahmad Hamzah said the unemployment rate in the country was increasing with 512,000 jobless workers.

    He added the number of under-employed workers was also on the rise with 500,000 people.

    Ismail said the under-employed people quit jobs to get better jobs and the insurance scheme would also include them. - FMT News, 9/3/2017

    Sistem Insurans Pekerjaan dilaksana 2018

    Oleh Nazura Ngah




    KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Najib Razak berkata, kerajaan bersetuju melaksanakan Sistem Insurans Pekerjaan (SIP) yang bakal dinikmati 6.5 juta pekerja tempatan dalam sektor swasta dengan jangkaan bayaran faedah boleh dibuat mulai 1 Januari 2019.

    Perdana Menteri berkata, pelaksanaan SIP yang menjadi jaringan keselamatan sosial akan dibiayai melalui caruman daripada pekerja dan majikan dengan dana SIP akan ditadbir urus oleh Pertubuhan Keselamatan Sosial (PERKESO).

    Beliau berkata, SIP bertujuan membantu golongan pekerja yang kehilangan pekerjaan untuk mendapat bantuan kewangan dan mencari pekerjaan baharu.

    Sehubungan itu, katanya, satu undang-undang baharu sedang digubal dan akan dibentangkan pada sesi persidangan Parlimen, Jun depan dan dijangka dikuatkuasakan pada 1 Januari 2018, manakala bayaran faedah boleh dibuat mulai 1 Januari 2019.

    "Pekerja akan mendapat bantuan saraan sementara dan mencari pekerjaan baharu melalui program perkhidmatan pekerjaan.


    "Ini meliputi bantuan carian kerja, kaunseling kerjaya dan pemadanan pekerjaan. Selain itu, pekerja yang kehilangan pekerjaan akan diberikan latihan secara latihan semula atau peningkatan kemahiran bagi mempertingkatkan kebolehkerjaan mereka," katanya dalam satu kenyataan, hari ini.

    Perdana Menteri berkata, kerajaan percaya inisiatif pelaksanaan SIP itu adalah satu dasar jangka panjang yang akan memberi impak positif, khususnya kepada golongan pekerja dan majikan.

    Beliau berkata, pengalaman negara lain menunjukkan SIP bertindak sebagai penstabil ekonomi dan membantu mengekalkan aktiviti ekonomi secara mapan khususnya ketika kegawatan.

    "SIP juga akan menambah baik kecekapan pasaran buruh melalui pemadanan penawaran dan permintaan yang lebih efisien, seterusnya meningkatkan produktiviti dan daya saing industri," katanya....Berita Harian Online, 23/3/2017

     

    Putrajaya to introduce Employment Insurance Scheme

    Thursday March 23, 2017
    07:56 PM GMT+8


    Najib said the law is expected to be enforced from January 1 next year, while the interest payment can be made from January 1, 2019. — Reuters picNajib said the law is expected to be enforced from January 1 next year, while the interest payment can be made from January 1, 2019. — Reuters pic














    KUALA LUMPUR, March 23 — The federal government has agreed to implement the proposed Employment Insurance Scheme (EIS) which will affect an estimated 6.5 million workers in the private sector, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced today.

    He said a new law is being drafted and will be presented at the next parliamentary sitting in June.

    He added that the law is expected to be enforced from January 1 next year, while the interest payment can be made from January 1, 2019.

    “The government believes the EIS initiative is a long-term policy that will give a positive impact especially to workers and employers,” he said in a statement this evening.

    He also said the insurance scheme has been proven to act as an “economic stabiliser” and helped sustain the economy in countries that have adopted it, especially during a crisis.

    He added that the scheme will help improve the labour market’s efficiency by making companies more competitive, which will result in increased productivity.

    The Bill was proposed by the government following concerns that the economic downturn would force companies to retrench workers.

    However, employers are opposed to the scheme, claiming that its introduction will raise their operating costs and could affect businesses severely amid an economic slowdown.

    A total of 91 industry organisations across various sectors registered their objection to the Human Resource Ministry as the EIS will require contribution from both employers and employees.

    The industry players said they are already paying retrenched workers benefits.

    They further argued that the entire country’s workforce paying contributions would only snowball into a fund of RM1.142 billion, while payout would only amount to RM17.13 million as there are currently just 0.03 per cent of workers who are not part of any existing retrenchment benefit list.


    Thursday, 13 April 2017 | MYT 7:28 PM

    Socso in defence of employment insurance scheme



    KUALA LUMPUR: The Social Security Organisation (Socso) has come out in defense of the proposed Employment Insurance Scheme (EIS) that has been objected to by various quarters.

    Its chief executive officer Datuk Mohammed Azman Aziz Mohammed (pix) said the benefits of such a scheme will see up to 300,000 workers being potential beneficiaries of the system.

    "The retrenchment figures in the past 10 to 20 years as reported to the government is about 30,000-40,000. Note that employers with five or less workers are not compelled to report to us.

    "Our current unemployment rate is about 3.5% this translates into about 500,000 people,” Azman said at a press briefing on Thursday.

    "Out of this figure, about 40 to 70% had some kind of employment before. So 137,000 to 300,000 are potential people who will be potential beneficiaries of the EIS,” he added.

    He said the contribution rates for the EIS by both employers and employees have not yet been set and will soon be determined.

    Asked if there would be a fixed contribution by the government for such as fund, Azman said that this matter has not been decided yet.

    "The government has already given an allocation of RM500mil during the Asian financial crisis.

    "During the recent USA subprime crisis, the government allocated another RM650mil.

    "The government has promised another RM80mil to start with and they have given us a grant of RM52mil to kick this off.

    "At the moment we are using whatever grants we have got to start the implementation of the EIS as we would need some resources to start this off,” he said.

    Commenting on concerns by employers who have voiced their concerns of rising costs of doing business through the respective associations and bodies, Azman said he was aware of their concerns.

    "No doubt that costs (of doing business) will always be there. Majority of employers have less than five workers, so you take five workers, say contribution for each worker is RM5 and one year’s total contribution is about RM300 and this is not much. We are engaging with the employers and we know their concerns,” he said.

    "Some have also raised concerns on whether they can get back the money they have contributed but the concept of this is the pulling of resources together and sharing of risks.

    "It’s like car insurance, if we don’t get into accidents we will not get back our money. Similar also to health insurance and personal accident insurance,” Azman added.

    He said that the monies received will not be outsourced to a third party insurance provider to be invested or managed but will be managed internally by Socso.

    Commenting on this issue Universiti Malaya’s director for social security research centre Prof Datuk Norma Mansor said that retrenchments cannot be anticipated and that the present workforce should be forward looking on this matter.

    "During the 1997 Asian financial crisis, nobody ever thought that the crisis then would ever happen.

    "We can be myopic from the way we think, we want the numbers now but this is not about now but rather the future.

    "Some may say that now may not be the best of times, but when then would it be a good time? We need to think how are we to support our people in times of need,” she said.

    "Companies will need to upgrade and innovate themselves through the adoption of technology when the country moves up in our level of development.

    "When this happens, people will be retrenched. So retrenchment does not just happen in times of economic distress but during times when industries are upgraded,” Norma added.

    The cabinet had last month approved for the EIS to be implemented by January 2018.

    Read more at http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2017/04/13/socso-defends-employment-insurance-scheme/#Ykxir4WuVPtEz51t.99

    Malaysian Airlines - 99% person voted for NUFAM, but BAD law says still no union recognition?

    $
    0
    0
    About 700 plus turned up and voted - 700 voted for the union, 2 voted against, and 5 votes were spoilt votes.(based on information received from NUFAM).

    See earlier post:-

    Malaysian Airlines - Secret Ballot for Union Recognition after MAB fails to accord recognition to NUFAM?



     INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS REGULATIONS 2009
     11  Formula to ascertain percentage of membership


    (1) The percentage of membership shall be calculated bases on the following formula:
    (2) The strength of the membership shall be determined on a simple majority vote basis.

    Flight Attendants from Malaysian Airlines came and voted but unfortunately 1,200 did not manage to turn up and cast their ballots. Why? Flight attendants fly around a lot making it not easy..After a long flight, they may have arrived at KLIA at 6.00 am - but could not yet vote since voting started at 9.00 am. There are many reasons why they did not turn up...some may even be afraid, for after all their employer REFUSED to accord recognition to NUFAM when NUFAM applied. Only when the Employer says "NO", will the Minister step in and a 'secret ballot' is conducted...unfortunately, there was no postal ballot here as was in our General Elections...

    According to the current BAD law, the flight attendants at MAS needed 51% votes in favour of the Union to enable the Minister to compel[ORDER] Malaysian Airlines Berhad(MAB), the new company running the Airlines to RECOGNIZE the Union.

    BUT, Malaysia's draconian law says otherwise....the law says that all those who did not manage to cast their votes would be deemed to have voted AGAINST, and with 1,900 flight attendants qualified to vote, the 1,200 that did not manage to case their vote would be deemed to have voted against... Hence, the Union would have only managed to get about 42%..according to the formula in the current unjust law.

    REASONABLE CONCLUSION would have been that the Union was victorious - since there were only 7 votes that were not for the Union. All 1,900 had the right and 'opportunity' to vote - and so, the outcome result just like in any election/voting should have been victory...

    INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1967
    9  Claim for recognition 9
    (3) An employer or a trade union of employers upon whom a claim for recognition has been served shall, within twenty-one days after the service of the claim-
    (a)accord recognition; or
    (b) if recognition is not accorded, notify the trade union of workmen concerned in writing the grounds for not according recognition; or

    (c) (Deleted by Act A1322:s.8)
    (3A) Upon according recognition to the trade union of workmen concerned under paragraph (3)(a), the employer or the trade union of employers concerned shall notify the Director General.

    (4) Where the trade union of workmen concerned receives a notification under paragraph (3)(b), or where the employer or trade union of employers concerned fails to comply with subsection (3), the trade union of workmen may, within fourteen days-
    (a) of the receipt of the notification; or
    (b) after the twenty-one day period in subsection (3) has lapsed,
    report the matter in writing to the Director General, failing which the claim for recognition shall be deemed to have been withdrawn.

    (4A) Upon receipt of a report under subsection (4), the Director General may take such steps or make such enquiries to ascertain-
    (a) the competence of the trade union of workmen concerned to represent any workmen or class of workmen in respect of whom the recognition is sought to be accorded; and
    (b) by way of secret ballot, the percentage of the workmen or class of workmen, in respect of whom recognition is being sought, who are members of the trade union of workmen making the claim.

    INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS ACT 1967
    12  Trade unions not accorded recognition


    Where a claim for recognition-
    (a) has been withdrawn by the trade union of workmen concerned after a report has been made by the trade union of workmen to the Director General under subsection 9(4); or
    (b) has been decided by the Minister under subsection 9(5), resulting in the trade union of workmen concerned not being accorded recognition,
    such trade union shall not make any further claim for recognition in respect of the same workmen or class of workmen until six months have elapsed from the date of such withdrawal or decision.

    FOR GREATER JUSTICE FOR WORKERS AND THEIR UNIONS... 

    * Every worker should have the RIGHT to join a trade union or not. [So, if only 20% of the workers want to join a trade union - why should these workers be denied the the right to RECOGNITION which will give them the right in law to a Collective Bargaining Agreement(CBA)] To force all workers to join a trade union, or even VOTE in secret ballots for union recognition may be considered a violation of worker rights...

    * The need to get the support of the majority of ALL qualified employees who can join a trade union to gain recognition is not just. Justly, this requirement should be changed to 20% from the present 50% plus one. It is unjust to deny the rights of those workers who want a trade union, just because the majority of the employees do not want to join union, or are simply 'disinterested'.

    * If a Union can show that it represents more than 20% of employees qualified to join the trade union, it should suffice to get recognition of employer. A Union only needs to PROVE its membership - presentation of membership list should suffice. No need to waste time with 'secret ballots'...worse case scenario - Statutory Declarations of all members of Union confirming their membership in the Union.

    * If the employer and the Union decide to enter into a Collective Bargaining Agreement, irrespective of the number of members it has, the LAW and/or the GOVERNMENT should not interfere...'Law sets minimum standards to ensure worker rights are respected - hence employer can always have a higher or better standard...

    * Good employers will support worker and trade union rights - and will simply accord recognition, and not deny or delay worker's right to a trade union, including right to enjoy the benefit of the Collective Bargaining Agreement(CBA)...now goverment-owned, government-controlled and/or government-linked companies should NEVER be seen not respecting worker and trade union rights. MAB, the wholly owned by government company, should never have even refused to accord recognition to NUFAM....that forced a 'secret ballot'...

    See earlier posts:-

    54 groups and unions:- Malaysian Airlines Must Respect Trade Union and Worker Rights Cease Anti-Union activities against NUFAM and its members

    47 Groups :- WORKER AND TRADE UNION RIGHTS MUST BE PRIORITIZED FOR THE WELLBEING OF THE WORKER AND THEIR FAMILIES

     


    Pekerja tak ada Kesatuan Sekerja boleh MENANG bila berjuang bersama - syabas pekerja Atlas Ice?

    $
    0
    0
    Rakyat/Pekerja di Malaysia biasa tunggu orang lain berjuang untuk mereka - sendiri tak mahu berjuang...tak mahu ambil risiko. Ada pula ambil sikap 'biar sahaja' apabila ditindas...

    Keadaan sama dengan KESATUAN SEKERJA - tunggu pemimpin sahaja bertindak (atau pemimpin mahu tindak sendiri) - tidak mahu berjuang bersama ahli Kesatuan...Bilakah kali terakhir anda lihat/dengar mengenai pekerja keluar beratusan berjuang untuk hak...

    BERJAYA - Pekerja Atlas Ice (Cawangan Batu Caves dan Kepong) telah bersatu dan berjuang BERSAMA untuk hak mereka  telah berjaya ...

    Keadilan boleh dicapai pekerja jika ada kesangguppan berjuang? Sumbangan KWSP?


    Hampir RM800,000 berjaya dituntut oleh 100 pekerja Kilang Atlas Edible Ais di Kepong dan Batu Caves!
    Post Berkaitan:- 

    ATLAS EDIBLE AIS workers complain about EPF Officer, and Employer failings in EPF Contributions?

    Pekerja Atlas Ice - Majikan Gagal Membuat Caruman KWSP Untuk Komisyen/'Profit Sharing"?



    Pekerja ini tidak ada KESATUAN SEKERJA - namun mereka telah 'organize' dan datang bersama dan berjuang untuk hak mereka...akhirnya telah berjaya tak sampai 7-8 bulan... 

    Pihak KWSP(seorang pegawai) mula-mula cuba menafikan hak mereka tetapi ini tidak memecahkan semangat pekerja ini yang telah terus berjuang untuk mendapatkan hak mereka...

    BERSAMA - itulah cara perjuangan yang digunakan. Jika Kesatuan hanya diwakili kepimpinan sahaja, ianya amat sukar - kerana majikan tak takut - tetapi jika ia perjuangan semua atau majoriti besar pekerja, keadaan lebih cerah bahawa kejayaan akan tercapai... Secara perbandingan, ramai tempat kerja yang ada Kesatuan Sekerja...bila majikan secara salah mencabul hak, tak pun kita nampak ratusan atau ribuan ahli keluar mengambil tindakan. Pos terdahulu, yang menunjukkan bahawa tindakan bersama semua ahli/pekerja akan berjaya adalah - 

    PERJUANGAN TERBUKA - DIHEBOHKAN PENCABULAN HAK - Banyak Kesatuan Sekerja kini, mungkin ada berjuang, tapi kita tak nampak kerana kebanyakkan perjuangan di buat secara 'senyap-senyap' - ahli sendiri pun kemungkinan tidak tahu atau dimaklumkan oleh pucuk kepimpinan...Perjuangan pekerja Atlas Ice dihebohkan melalui media sosial dan juga media...

    PERJUANGAN MESTI BERTERUSAN SAMPAI DAPAT - Kini cara perjuanga hanya kadar keluarkan satu kenyataan media atau buat satu piket atau hantar satu surat tidak akan berjaya...ia mestilah perjuangan berterusan sampai dapat. Di negara lain, termasuk negara jiran Thailand, jika pemimpin atau ahli dibuang kerja secara salah, pekerja akan keluar berpiket atau protes berhari-hari, berminggu-minggu, berbulan-bulan...sampai dapat. Ada juga akan 'mogok'...


    MEDIA sama ada 'mainstream' atau 'alternatif' pun sedih sekali tidak melapurkan banyak tentang penindasan dihadapi pekerja, perjuangan pekerja dan/atau juga kemenangan pekerja...


    MTUC proposes 13 reforms to achieve socio-economic justice?

    $
    0
    0

    MTUC proposes 13 reforms to achieve socio-economic justice

    2 May 2017
    untitled-1 
     
    On behalf of the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC), we extend fraternal greetings to all workers in Malaysia and the world over.
     
    Workers have with courage and determination contributed to the growth of our nation.
     
    For the 14 million local and five (5) million foreign workers in Malaysia, Labour Day will remind us to be grateful to our forefathers who fought and sacrificed their lives to secure eight hours work which we enjoy today.
     
    On this Labour Day, we must seriously note the observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) with regard to worker-related affairs in our country.
     
    Malaysia has been classified under Category 4 of the Global Human and Trade Union Rights Index. Category 4 means the workers and trade unions face silent, subtle and systematic actions to suppress and prevent workers and trade unions from exercising their rights and undermining workers’ rights for just and fair developments/growth and progress.
     
    In view of this, our efforts should be to take corrective measures to undo these negative sentiments. In order to achieve socio-economic justice and to ensure Malaysia’s Vision 2020 goals are achieved, we need to work hand in hand for the following reforms:
     
    Legislative justice
     
    1. The current Labour laws must be amended with pre-emptive and pragmatic grievance handling procedures which will definitely achieve a cultured work environment in Malaysia for its betterment.
     
    2. Cases that do not see the light of settlement at the Industrial Relations Department must be referred directly to the Industrial Court.
     
    The current practice of the human resources minister determining the reference is injustice to workers/unions, resulting in unnecessary expansion of workers/unions funds for judicial review.
     
    3. The limitation of 24 months on back wages for unfair dismissal must be revoked immediately since cases cannot be heard and determined with the said time frame. Further, discounts on the amount of compensation paid just because the unfairly dismissed workers are gainfully employed at the time of determining the case must also be abolished.
     
    4. The Human Resource Development Fund should be extended to all sectors and shall spell out provisions for training for all levels of workers, not executives and top management.
     
    5. The Education Act should introduce basic Labour Laws and Rights in the school curriculum so that students will understand and know the value of work when they enter the world of work.
     
    6. The Employees Provident Fund (EPF) Act must be amended to ensure that workers’ monies in the EPF is not invested in entities that exploit workers and indulge in union busting.
     
    Economic justice
     
    There must be equitable distribution of wealth for the people of this country all of God’s children and rights that are real and respected by all.
     
    7. Declaration of higher dividend on the EPF for the year 2016 must be declared. We have substantiated the facts and communicated to the Honourable Prime Minister. The EPF is the only available retirement benefit for the private sector workers. Therefore, in the context of ever-increasing cost of living, the accumulated fund of the workers at the time of retirement must be given real value.
     
    8. Minimum wage to be raised to RM1,500.00 and all employers to pay a cost of living allowance (Cola) of RM300.00 immediately for the B40 and M40 categories. This will assist in overcoming increased cost of living.
     
    9. Access to affordable home including affordable interest rates must be looked at immediately.
     
    Social
     
    10. Engagement with social partners must be strengthened to facilitate initiatives in resolving issues affecting workers/trade union rights to create a far better atmosphere and enhanced productivity.
     
    11. Draw up criteria to qualify as Industrial Court chairpersons. They must be properly trained in Industrial Laws and Practices and International Labour Standards.
     
    12. Technology must be enhanced to better serve the public and not simply to lay off workers. The technological advancement and the resultant impact on workers’ livelihood is frightening and will be disastrous if steps to establish a safety net is not drawn-up fast.
     
    13. Local workers cannot be replaced by foreign workers instead, guidelines to ensure employers deployed foreign workers in the right perspective should be drawn up. Further, foreign workers should be granted equal rights as well as the right to join unions.
     
    If we, in any way, fail to contribute towards securing socio-economic justice, then we lack the social vision in whatever we are doing for the organisation, for the nation and for the next generation.
     
    Therefore, our bold contention is that if the tripartism works well, we can achieve enormous tasks for the needs of society as a whole. We definitely have the ability to accomplish it, and our nation has the ability to provide it.
     
    We wish all workers a Happy Labour Day.
     
    J SOLOMON is secretary-general, Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC).
     
    Source : https://m.malaysiakini.com/letters/380790#.WQdATf7hosQ.whatsapp
    Viewing all 2589 articles
    Browse latest View live